Chapter 6.—That All Marvels are Not of Nature’s Production, But that Some are Due to Human Ingenuity and Others to Diabolic Contrivance.
Caput VI. Quod non omnia miracula naturalia sint, sed pleraque humano ingenio modificata, pleraque autem daemonum arte conposita.
At this point they will perhaps reply, “These things have no existence; we don’t believe one of them; they are travellers’ tales and fictitious romances;” and they may add what has the appearance of argument, and say, “If you believe such things as these, believe what is recorded in the same books, that there was or is a temple of Venus in which a candelabrum set in the open air holds a lamp, which burns so strongly that no storm or rain extinguishes it, and which is therefore called, like the stone mentioned above, the asbestos or inextinguishable lamp.” They may say this with the intention of putting us into a dilemma: for if we say this is incredible, then we shall impugn the truth of the other recorded marvels; if, on the other hand, we admit that this is credible, we shall avouch the pagan deities. But, as I have already said in the eighteenth book of this work, we do not hold it necessary to believe all that profane history contains, since, as Varro says, even historians themselves disagree on so many points, that one would think they intended and were at pains to do so; but we believe, if we are disposed, those things which are not contradicted by these books, which we do not hesitate to say we are bound to believe. But as to those permanent miracles of nature, whereby we wish to persuade the sceptical of the miracles of the world to come, those are quite sufficient for our purpose which we ourselves can observe or of which it is not difficult to find trustworthy witnesses. Moreover, that temple of Venus, with its inextinguishable lamp, so far from hemming us into a corner, opens an advantageous field to our argument. For to this inextinguishable lamp we add a host of marvels wrought by men, or by magic,—that is, by men under the influence of devils, or by the devils directly,—for such marvels we cannot deny without impugning the truth of the sacred Scriptures we believe. That lamp, therefore, was either by some mechanical and human device fitted with asbestos, or it was arranged by magical art in order that the worshippers might be astonished, or some devil under the name of Venus so signally manifested himself that this prodigy both began and became permanent. Now devils are attracted to dwell in certain temples by means of the creatures (God’s creatures, not theirs), who present to them what suits their various tastes. They are attracted not by food like animals, but, like spirits, by such symbols as suit their taste, various kinds of stones, woods, plants, animals, songs, rites. And that men may provide these attractions, the devils first of all cunningly seduce them, either by imbuing their hearts with a secret poison, or by revealing themselves under a friendly guise, and thus make a few of them their disciples, who become the instructors of the multitude. For unless they first instructed men, it were impossible to know what each of them desires, what they shrink from, by what name they should be invoked or constrained to be present. Hence the origin of magic and magicians. But, above all, they possess the hearts of men, and are chiefly proud of this possession when they transform themselves into angels of light. Very many things that occur, therefore, are their doing; and these deeds of theirs we ought all the more carefully to shun as we acknowledge them to be very surprising. And yet these very deeds forward my present arguments. For if such marvels are wrought by unclean devils, how much mightier are the holy angels! and what can not that God do who made the angels themselves capable of working miracles!
Hic forte respondeant: Trorsus nec ista sunt nec ista credimus; falsa de his dicta, falsa conscripta sunt’; et adiciant ratiocinantes adque dicentes: ‘Si talia credenda sunt, credite et uos quod in easdem litteras est relatum, fuisse uel esse quoddam Veneris fanum adque ibi candelabrum et in eo lucernam sub diuo sic ardentem, ut eam nulla tempestas, nullus imber exstingueret, unde sicut ille lapis, ita ista λύχνος ἄσβεστος, t id est lucerna inexstinguibilis, nominata est.’ Quod propterea poterunt dicere, ut respondendi nobis angustias ingerant; quia si dixerimus non esse credendum, scripta illa miraculorum infirmabimus; si autem credendum esse concesserimus, firmabimus numina paganorum. Sed nos, sicut iam in libro duodeuicensimo huius operis dixi, non habemus necesse omnia credere, quae historia continet gentium, cum et ipsi inter se historici, sicut ait Varro, quasi data opera et quasi ex industria per multa dissentiant; sed ea, si uolumus. credimus, quae non aduersantur libris, quibus non dubitamus oportere nos credere. De his autem miraculorum locis nobis ad ea, quae futura persuadere incredulis uolumus, satis illa sufficiunt, quae nos quoque possumus experiri, et eorum testes idoneos non difficile est inuenire. De isto autem fano Veneris et lucerna inexstinguibili non solum in nullas coartamur angustias, uerum etiam latitudinis nobis campus aperitur. Addimus enim ad istam lucernam inexstinguibilem et humanarum et magicarum, id est per homines daemonicarum artium et ipsorum per se ipsos daemonum multa miracula; quae si negare uoluerimus, eidem ipsi cui credimus sacrarum litterarum aduersabimur ueritati. Aut ergo in lucerna illa mechanicum aliquid de lapide asbesto ars humana molita est aut arte magica factum est, quod homines illo mirarentur in templo, aut daemon quispiam sub nomine Veneris tanta se efficacia praesentauit, ut hoc ibi prodigium et appareret hominibus et diutius permaneret. Inliciuntur autem daemones ad inhabitandum per creaturas, quas non ipsi, sed Deus condidit, delectabilibus pro sua diuersitate diuersis, non ut animalia cibis, sed ut spiritus signis, quae cuiusque delectationi congruunt, per uaria genera lapidum herbarum, lignorum animalium, carminum rituum. Ut autem inliciantur ab hominibus, prius eos ipsi astutissima calliditate seducunt, uel inspirando eorum cordibus uirus occultum uel etiam fallacibus amicitiis apparendo, eorumque paucos discipulos suos faciunt plurimorumque doctores. Neque enim potuit, nisi primum ipsis docentibus, disci quid quisque illorum adpetat, quid exhorreat, quo inuitetur nomine, quo cogatur; unde magicae artes earumque artifices exstiterunt. Maxime autem possident corda mortalium, qua potissimum possessione gloriantur, cum se transfigurant in angelos lucis. Sunt ergo facta eorum plurima, quae quanto magis mirabilia confitemur, tanto cautius uitare debemus; sed ad hoc, unde nunc agimus, nobis etiam ipsa proficiunt. Si enim haec inmundi daemones possunt, quanto potentiores sunt sancti angeli, quanto potentior est his omnibus Deus, qui tantorum miraculorum effectores etiam ipsos angelos fecit!
If, then, very many effects can be contrived by human art, of so surprising a kind that the uninitiated think them divine, as when, e.g., in a certain temple two magnets have been adjusted, one in the roof, another in the floor, so that an iron image is suspended in mid-air between them, one would suppose by the power of the divinity, were he ignorant of the magnets above and beneath; or, as in the case of that lamp of Venus which we already mentioned as being a skillful adaptation of asbestos; if, again, by the help of magicians, whom Scripture calls sorcerers and enchanters, the devils could gain such power that the noble poet Virgil should consider himself justified in describing a very powerful magician in these lines:
“Her charms can cure what souls she please,
Quam ob rem si tot et tanta mirifica, quae μηχανήματα appellant, Dei creatura utentibus humanis artibus fiunt, ut ea qui nesciunt opinentur esse diuina (unde factum est,’ ut in quodam templo lapidibus magnetibus in solo et camera proportione magnitudinis positis simulacrum ferreum aeris illius medio inter utrumque lapidem ignorantibus, quid sursum esset ac deorsum, quasi numinis potestate penderet: quale aliquid etiam in illa lucerna Veneris de lapide asbesto ab artifice fieri potuisse iam diximus); si magorum opera, quos nostra scriptura ueneficos et incantatores uocat, in tantum daemones extollere potuerunt, ut congruere hominum sensibus sibi nobilis poeta uideretur, de quadam femina, quae tali arte polleret, dicens: Haec se carminibus promittit soluere mentes Quas uelit, ast aliis duras inmittere curas, Sistere aquam fluuiis et uertere sidera retro;- Nocturnosque ciet manes: mugire uidebis Sub pedibus terram et descendere montibus ornos: quanto magis Deus potens est facere quae infidelibus sunt incredibilia, sed illius facilia potestati; quando quidem ipse lapidum aliarumque uim rerum et hominum ingenia, qui ea miris utuntur modis, angelicasque naturas omnibus terrenis potentiores animantibus condidit, uniuersa mirabilia mirabili uincente uirtute et operandi iubendi sinendique sapientia, utens omnibus tam mirabiliter, quam creauit.
Rob other hearts of healthful ease,
Turn rivers backward to their source,
And make the stars forget their course,
And call up ghosts from night:
The ground shall bellow ’neath your feet:
The mountain-ash shall quit its seat,
And travel down the height;”—
if this be so, how much more able is God to do those things which to sceptics are incredible, but to His power easy, since it is He who has given to stones and all other things their virtue, and to men their skill to use them in wonderful ways; He who has given to the angels a nature more mighty than that of all that lives on earth; He whose power surpasses all marvels, and whose wisdom in working, ordaining, and permitting is no less marvellous in its governance of all things than in its creation of all!
That the Ultimate Reason for Believing Miracles is the Omnipotence of the Creator.
Chapter 7.—That the Ultimate Reason for Believing Miracles is the Omnipotence of the Creator.
Caput VII. Quod in rebus miris summa credendi ratio sit omnipotentia Creatoris.
Why, then, cannot God effect both that the bodies of the dead shall rise, and that the bodies of the damned shall be tormented in everlasting fire,—God, who made the world full of countless miracles in sky, earth, air, and waters, while itself is a miracle unquestionably greater and more admirable than all the marvels it is filled with? But those with whom or against whom we are arguing, who believe both that there is a God who made the world, and that there are gods created by Him who administer the world’s laws as His viceregents,—our adversaries, I say, who, so far from denying emphatically, assert that there are powers in the world which effect marvellous results (whether of their own accord, or because they are invoked by some rite or prayer, or in some magical way), when we lay before them the wonderful properties of other things which are neither rational animals nor rational spirits, but such material objects as those we have just cited, are in the habit of replying, This is their natural property, their nature; these are the powers naturally belonging to them. Thus the whole reason why Agrigentine salt dissolves in fire and crackles in water is that this is its nature. Yet this seems rather contrary to nature, which has given not to fire but to water the power of melting salt, and the power of scorching it not to water but to fire. But this they say, is the natural property of this salt, to show effects contrary to these. The same reason, therefore, is assigned to account for that Garamantian fountain, of which one and the same runlet is chill by day and boiling by night, so that in either extreme it cannot be touched. So also of that other fountain which, though it is cold to the touch, and though it, like other fountains, extinguishes a lighted torch, yet, unlike other fountains, and in a surprising manner, kindles an extinguished torch. So of the asbestos stone, which, though it has no heat of its own, yet when kindled by fire applied to it, cannot be extinguished. And so of the rest, which I am weary of reciting, and in which, though there seems to be an extraordinary property contrary to nature, yet no other reason is given for them than this, that this is their nature,—a brief reason truly, and, I own, a satisfactory reply. But since God is the author of all natures, how is it that our adversaries, when they refuse to believe what we affirm, on the ground that it is impossible, are unwilling to accept from us a better explanation than their own, viz., that this is the will of Almighty God,—for certainly He is called Almighty only because He is mighty to do all He will,—He who was able to create so many marvels, not only unknown, but very well ascertained, as I have been showing, and which, were they not under our own observation, or reported by recent and credible witnesses, would certainly be pronounced impossible? For as for those marvels which have no other testimony than the writers in whose books we read them, and who wrote without being divinely instructed, and are therefore liable to human error, we cannot justly blame any one who declines to believe them.
Quur itaque facere non possit Deus, ut et resurgant corpora mortuorum et igne aeterno crucientur corpora damnatorum, qui fecit mundum in caelo in terra, in aere in aquis innumerabilibus miraculis plenum, cum sit omnibus quibus plenus est procul dubio maius et excellentius etiam mundus ipse miraculum? Sed isti, cum quibus uel contra quos agimus, qui et Deum esse credunt, a quo factus est mundus, et deos ab illo factos, per quos ab illo administratur mundus, et miraculorum effectrices siue spontaneorum siue cultu et ritu quolibet inpetratorum siue etiam magicorum mundanas uel non negant uel insuper et praedicant potestates, quando eis rerum uim mirabilem proponimus aliarum, quae nec animalia sunt rationalia nec ulla ratione praediti spiritus, sicut sunt ea, quorum pauca commemorauimus, respondere adsolent: <Vis est ista naturae, natura eorum sic se habet, propriarum sunt istae efficaciae naturarum.’ Tota itaque ratio est, quur Agrigentinum salem flamma fluere faciat, aqua crepitare, quia haec est natura eius. At hoc esse potius contra naturam uidetur, quae non igni, sed aquae dedit salem soluere, torrere autem igni, non aquae. Sed ista, inquiunt, salis huius naturalis est uis, ut his contraria patiatur. Haec igitur ratio redditur et de illo fonte Garamantico, ubi una uena friget diebus, noctibus feruet, ui utraque molesta tangentibus; haec et de illo alio, qui cum sit contrectantibus frigidus et facem sicut alii fontes exstinguat accensam, dissimiliter tamen adque mirabiliter idem ipse accendit exstinctam; haec et de lapide asbesto, qui cum ignem nullum habeat proprium, accepto tamen sic ardet alieno, ut non possit exstingui; haec de ceteris, quae piget retexere, quibus licet uis insolita contra naturam inesse uideatur, alia tamen de illis non redditur ratio, nisi ut dicatur hanc eorum esse naturam. Breuis sane ista est ratio, fateor, sufficiensque responsio. Sed cum Deus auctor sit naturarum omnium, quur nolunt fortiorem nos reddere rationem, quando aliquid uelut inpossibile nolunt credere eisque redditionem rationis poscentibus respondemus hanc esse uoluntatem omnipotentis Dei? qui certe non ob aliud uocatur omnipotens, nisi quoniam quidquid uult potest, qui potuit creare tam multa, quae nisi ostenderentur aut a credendis hodieque dicerentur testibus, profecto inpossibilia putarentur, non solum quae ignotissima aput nos, uerum etiam quae notissima posui. Illa enim quae [aput nos] praeter eos, quorum de his libros legimus, non habent testem et ab eis conscripta sunt, qui non sunt diuinitus docti adque humanitus falli forte potuerunt, licet cuique sine recta reprehensione non credere.
For my own part, I do not wish all the marvels I have cited to be rashly accepted, for I do not myself believe them implicitly, save those which have either come under my own observation, or which any one can readily verify, such as the lime which is heated by water and cooled by oil; the magnet which by its mysterious and insensible suction attracts the iron, but has no affect on a straw; the peacock’s flesh which triumphs over the corruption from which not the flesh of Plato is exempt; the chaff so chilling that it prevents snow from melting, so heating that it forces apples to ripen; the glowing fire, which, in accordance with its glowing appearance, whitens the stones it bakes, while, contrary to its glowing appearance, it begrimes most things it burns (just as dirty stains are made by oil, however pure it be, and as the lines drawn by white silver are black); the charcoal, too, which by the action of fire is so completely changed from its original, that a finely marked piece of wood becomes hideous, the tough becomes brittle, the decaying incorruptible. Some of these things I know in common with many other persons, some of them in common with all men; and there are many others which I have not room to insert in this book. But of those which I have cited, though I have not myself seen, but only read about them, I have been unable to find trustworthy witnesses from whom I could ascertain whether they are facts, except in the case of that fountain in which burning torches are extinguished and extinguished torches lit, and of the apples of Sodom, which are ripe to appearance, but are filled with dust. And indeed I have not met with any who said they had seen that fountain in Epirus, but with some who knew there was a similar fountain in Gaul not far from Grenoble. The fruit of the trees of Sodom, however, is not only spoken of in books worthy of credit, but so many persons say that they have seen it that I cannot doubt the fact. But the rest of the prodigies I receive without definitely affirming or denying them; and I have cited them because I read them in the authors of our adversaries, and that I might prove how many things many among themselves believe, because they are written in the works of their own literary men, though no rational explanation of them is given, and yet they scorn to believe us when we assert that Almighty God will do what is beyond their experience and observation; and this they do even though we assign a reason for His work. For what better and stronger reason for such things can be given than to say that the Almighty is able to bring them to pass, and will bring them to pass, having predicted them in those books in which many other marvels which have already come to pass were predicted? Those things which are regarded as impossible will be accomplished according to the word, and by the power of that God who predicted and effected that the incredulous nations should believe incredible wonders.
Nam nec ego uolo temere credi cuncta quae posui, quia nec a me ipso ita creduntur, tamquam nulla de illis sit in mea cogitatione dubitatio, exceptis his, quae uel ipse sum expertus et cuiuis facile est experiri; sicut de calce, quod feruet in aqua, in oleo frigida est; de magnete lapide, quod nescio qua sorbitione insensibili stipulam non moueat et ferrum rapiat; de carne non putescente pauonis, cum putuerit et Platonis; de palea sic frigente, ut Suescere niuem non sinat, sic calente ut maturescere poma conpellat; de igne fulgido, quod secundum suam fulgorem lapides coquendo candificet et contra eundem suum fulgorem urendo plurima obfuscet. Tale est et quod nigrae maculae offunduntur ex oleo splendido, similiter nigrae lineae de candido inprimuntur argento, de carbonibus etiam, quod accendente igne sic uertantur in contrarium, ut de lignis pulcherrimis taetri, fragiles de duris, inputribiles de putribilibus fiant. Haec ipse quaedam cum multis, quaedam cum omnibus noui, et alia plurima, quae huic libro inserere longum fuit. De his autem, quae posui non experta, sed lecta, praeter de fonte illo, ubi faces exstinguuntur ardentes et accenduntur exstinctae, et de pomis terrae Sodomorum forinsecus quasi maturis, intrinsecus fumeis, nec testes aliquos idoneos, a quibus utrum uera essent audirem, potui reperire. Et illum quidem fontem non inueni qui in Epiro uidisse se dicerent, sed qui in Gallia similem nossent non longe a Gratianopoli ciuitate. De fructibus autem arborum Sodomitarum non tantum litterae fide dignae indicant, uerum etiam tam multi se loquuntur expertos, ut hinc dubitare non possim. Cetera uero sic’ habeo, ut neque neganda neque adfirmanda decreuerim; sed ideo etiam ipsa posui, quoniam aput eorum, contra quos agimus, historicos legi, ut ostenderem qualia multa multique illorum nulla reddita ratione in suorum litteratorum scripta litteris credant, qui nobis credere, quando id, quod eorum experientiam sensumque transgreditur, omnipotentem Deum dicimus esse facturum, nec reddita ratione dignantur. Nam quae melior et ualidior ratio de rebus talibus redditur, quam cum Omnipotens ea posse facere perhibetur et facturus dicitur, quae praenuntiasse ibi legitur, ubi alia multa praenuntiauit, quae fecisse monstratur? Ipse quippe faciet, quia se facturum esse praedixit, quae inpossibilia putantur, qui promisit et fecit ut ab incredulis gentibus incredibilia crederentur.
That It is Not Contrary to Nature That, in an Object Whose Nature is Known, There Should Be Discovered an Alteration of the Properties Which Have Been Known as Its Natural Properties.
Chapter 8.—That It is Not Contrary to Nature That, in an Object Whose Nature is Known, There Should Be Discovered an Alteration of the Properties Which Have Been Known as Its Natural Properties.
Caput VIII. Non esse contra naturam, cum in aliqua re, cuius natura innotuit, aliquid ab eo quod erat notum incipit esse diuersum.
But if they reply that their reason for not believing us when we say that human bodies will always burn and yet never die, is that the nature of human bodies is known to be quite otherwise constituted; if they say that for this miracle we cannot give the reason which was valid in the case of those natural miracles, viz., that this is the natural property, the nature of the thing,—for we know that this is not the nature of human flesh,—we find our answer in the sacred writings, that even this human flesh was constituted in one fashion before there was sin,—was constituted, in fact, so that it could not die,—and in another fashion after sin, being made such as we see it in this miserable state of mortality, unable to retain enduring life. And so in the resurrection of the dead shall it be constituted differently from its present well-known condition. But as they do not believe these writings of ours, in which we read what nature man had in paradise, and how remote he was from the necessity of death,—and indeed, if they did believe them, we should of course have little trouble in debating with them the future punishment of the damned,—we must produce from the writings of their own most learned authorities some instances to show that it is possible for a thing to become different from what it was formerly known characteristically to be.
Si autem respondent propterea se non credere quae de humanis semper arsuris nec umquam morituris corporibus dicimus, quia humanorum corporum naturam nouimus longe aliter institutam, unde nec illa ratio hinc reddi potest, quae de illis naturis mirabilibus reddebatur, ut dici possit: ‘Vis ista naturalis est, rei huius ista natura est’; quoniam scimus humanae carnis istam non esse naturam: habemus quidem quod respondeamus de litteris sacris, hanc ipsam scilicet humanam carnem aliter institutam fuisse ante peccatum, id est, ut posset numquam perpeti mortem; aliter autem post peccatum, qualis in aerumna huius mortalitatis innotuit, ut perpetem uitam tenere non possit; sic ergo aliter, quam nobis nota est, instituetur in resurrectione mortuorum. Sed quoniam istis non credunt litteris, ubi legitur qualis in paradiso uixerit homo quantumque fuerit a necessitate mortis alienus (quibus utique si crederent, non cum illis de poena damnatorum, quae futura est, operosius ageremus): de litteris eorum. qui doctissimi aput illos fuerunt, aliquid proferendum est, quo appareat posse fieri, ut aliter se habeat quaeque res, quam prius in rebus innotuerat suae determinatione naturae.
From the book of Marcus Varro, entitled, Of the Race of the Roman People, I cite word for word the following instance: “There occurred a remarkable celestial portent; for Castor records that, in the brilliant star Venus, called Vesperugo by Plautus, and the lovely Hesperus by Homer, there occurred so strange a prodigy, that it changed its color, size, form, course, which never happened before nor since. Adrastus of Cyzicus, and Dion of Naples, famous mathematicians, said that this occurred in the reign of Ogyges.” So great an author as Varro would certainly not have called this a portent had it not seemed to be contrary to nature. For we say that all portents are contrary to nature; but they are not so. For how is that contrary to nature which happens by the will of God, since the will of so mighty a Creator is certainly the nature of each created thing? A portent, therefore, happens not contrary to nature, but contrary to what we know as nature. But who can number the multitude of portents recorded in profane histories? Let us then at present fix our attention on this one only which concerns the matter in hand. What is there so arranged by the Author of the nature of heaven and earth as the exactly ordered course of the stars? What is there established by laws so sure and inflexible? And yet, when it pleased Him who with sovereignty and supreme power regulates all He has created, a star conspicuous among the rest by its size and splendor changed its color, size, form, and, most wonderful of all, the order and law of its course! Certainly that phenomenon disturbed the canons of the astronomers, if there were any then, by which they tabulate, as by unerring computation, the past and future movements of the stars, so as to take upon them to affirm that this which happened to the morning star (Venus) never happened before nor since. But we read in the divine books that even the sun itself stood still when a holy man, Joshua the son of Nun, had begged this from God until victory should finish the battle he had begun; and that it even went back, that the promise of fifteen years added to the life of king Hezekiah might be sealed by this additional prodigy. But these miracles, which were vouchsafed to the merits of holy men, even when our adversaries believe them, they attribute to magical arts; so Virgil, in the lines I quoted above, ascribes to magic the power to
Est in Marci Varronis libris, quorum inscriptio est: De gente populi Romani, quod eisdem uerbis, quibus ibi legitur, et hic ponam: ‘In caelo, inquit, mirabile exstitit portentum: nam stellam Veneris nobilissimam, quam Plautus Vesperugiuem, Homerus Hesperon appellat, pulcherrimam dicens, Castor scribit tantum portentum exstitisse, ut mutaret colorem, magnitudinem, figuram, cursum; quod factum ita neque antea nec postea sit. Hoc factum Ogygo rege dicebant Adrastos Cyzicenos et Dion Neapolites, mathematici nobiles.’ Hoc certe Varro tantus auctor portentum non appellaret, nisi esse contra naturam uideretur. Omnia quippe portenta contra naturam dicimus esse; sed non sunt. Quo modo est enim contra naturam, quod Dei fit uoluntate, cum uoluntas tanti utique conditoris conditae rei cuiusque natura sit? Portentum ergo fit non contra naturam, sed contra quam est nota natura. Quis autem portentorum numerat multitudinem, quae historia gentium continetur? Sed nunc in hoc uno adtendamus, quod ad rem, de qua agimus, pertinet. Quid ita dispositum est ab auctore naturae caeli et terrae, quem ad modum cursus ordinatissimus siderum? Quid tam ratis legibus fixisque firmatum? Et tamen, quando ille uoluit, qui summo regit imperio ac potestate quod condidit. stella prae ceteris magnitudine ac splendore notissima colorem, magnitudinem, figuram et (quod est mirabilius) sui cursus ordinem legemque mutauit. Turbauit profecto tunc, si ulli iam fuerunt, canones astrologorum, quos uelut inerrabili conputatione de praeteritis ac futuris astrorum motibus conscriptos habent, quos canones sequendo ausi sunt dicere. hoc, quod de Lucifero contigit, nec antea nec postea contigisse. Nos autem in diuinis libris legimus etiam solem ipsum et stetisse, cum hoc a Domino Deo petiuisset uir sanctus Iesus Naue, donec coeptum proelium uictoria terminaret, et retrorsum redisse, ut regi Ezechiae quindecim anni ad uiuendum additi hoc etiam prodigio promissioni Dei significarentur adiuncto.
“Turn rivers backward to their source,
Sed ista quoque miracula, quae meritis sunt concessa sanctorum, quando credunt isti facta, magicis artibus tribuunt.
And make the stars forget their course.”
For in our sacred books we read that this also happened, that a river “turned backward,” was stayed above while the lower part flowed on, when the people passed over under the above-mentioned leader, Joshua the son of Nun; and also when Elias the prophet crossed; and afterwards, when his disciple Elisha passed through it: and we have just mentioned how, in the case of king Hezekiah the greatest of the “stars forgot its course.” But what happened to Venus, according to Varro, was not said by him to have happened in answer to any man’s prayer.
Unde illud est, quod superius commemoraui dixisse Vergilium: Sistere aquam fluuiis et uertere sidera retro. Nam et fluuium stetisse superius inferiusque fluxisse, cum populus Dei ductore supra memorato Iesu Naue uiam carperet, et Helia propheta transeunte ac postea discipulo eius Helisaeo id esse factum in sacris litteris legimus, et retro uersum fuisse maximum sidus regnante Ezechia modo commemorauimus.
Let not the sceptics then benight themselves in this knowledge of the nature of things, as if divine power cannot bring to pass in an object anything else than what their own experience has shown them to be in its nature. Even the very things which are most commonly known as natural would not be less wonderful nor less effectual to excite surprise in all who beheld them, if men were not accustomed to admire nothing but what is rare. For who that thoughtfully observes the countless multitude of men, and their similarity of nature, can fail to remark with surprise and admiration the individuality of each man’s appearance, suggesting to us, as it does, that unless men were like one another, they would not be distinguished from the rest of the animals; while unless, on the other hand, they were unlike, they could not be distinguished from one another, so that those whom we declare to be like, we also find to be unlike? And the unlikeness is the more wonderful consideration of the two; for a common nature seems rather to require similarity. And yet, because the very rarity of things is that which makes them wonderful, we are filled with much greater wonder when we are introduced to two men so like, that we either always or frequently mistake in endeavoring to distinguish between them.
Quod uero de Lucifero Varro scripsit, non est illic dictum alicui petenti homini id fuisse concessum. Non ergo de notitia naturarum caliginem sibi faciant infideles, quasi non possit in aliqua re diuinitus fieri aliud, quamdiu eius natura per humanam suam experientiam cognouerunt; quamuis et ipsa, quae in rerum natura omnibus nota sunt, non minus mira sint, essentque stupenda considerantibus cunctis, si, solerent homines mirari mira nisi rara. Quis enim consulta ratione non uideat in hominum innumerabili numerositate et tanta naturae similitudine ualde mirabiliter sic habere singulos singulas facies, ut nisi inter se similes essent, non discerneretur species eorum ab animalibus ceteris; et rursus nisi inter se dissimiles essent, non discernerentur singuli ab hominibus ceteris? Quos ergo similes confitemur, eosdem dissimiles inuenimus. Sed mirabilior est consideratio dissimilitudinis, quoniam similitudinem iustius uidetur exposcere natura communis. Et tamen quoniam quae sunt rara ipsa sunt mira, multo amplius admiramur quando duos ita similes reperimus, ut in eis discernendis aut semper aut frequenter erremus.
But possibly, though Varro is a heathen historian, and a very learned one, they may disbelieve that what I have cited from him truly occurred; or they may say the example is invalid, because the star did not for any length of time continue to follow its new course, but returned to its ordinary orbit. There is, then, another phenomenon at present open to their observation, and which, in my opinion, ought to be sufficient to convince them that, though they have observed and ascertained some natural law, they ought not on that account to prescribe to God, as if He could not change and turn it into something very different from what they have observed. The land of Sodom was not always as it now is; but once it had the appearance of other lands, and enjoyed equal if not richer fertility; for, in the divine narrative, it was compared to the paradise of God. But after it was touched [by fire] from heaven, as even pagan history testifies, and as is now witnessed by those who visit the spot, it became unnaturally and horribly sooty in appearance; and its apples, under a deceitful appearance of ripeness, contain ashes within. Here is a thing which was of one kind, and is of another. You see how its nature was converted by the wonderful transmutation wrought by the Creator of all natures into so very disgusting a diversity,—an alteration which after so long a time took place, and after so long a time still continues. As therefore it was not impossible to God to create such natures as He pleased, so it is not impossible to Him to change these natures of His own creation into whatever He pleases, and thus spread abroad a multitude of those marvels which are called monsters, portents, prodigies, phenomena, and which if I were minded to cite and record, what end would there be to this work? They say that they are called “monsters,” because they demonstrate or signify something; “portents,” because they portend something; and so forth. But let their diviners see how they are either deceived, or even when they do predict true things, it is because they are inspired by spirits, who are intent upon entangling the minds of men (worthy, indeed, of such a fate) in the meshes of a hurtful curiosity, or how they light now and then upon some truth, because they make so many predictions. Yet, for our part, these things which happen contrary to nature, and are said to be contrary to nature (as the apostle, speaking after the manner of men, says, that to graft the wild olive into the good olive, and to partake of its fatness, is contrary to nature), and are called monsters, phenomena, portents, prodigies, ought to demonstrate, portend, predict that God will bring to pass what He has foretold regarding the bodies of men, no difficulty preventing Him, no law of nature prescribing to Him His limit. How He has foretold what He is to do, I think I have sufficiently shown in the preceding book, culling from the sacred Scriptures, both of the New and Old Testaments, not, indeed, all the passages that relate to this, but as many as I judged to suffice for this work.
Sed quod dixi scriptum a Varrone, licet eorum sit historicus idemque doctissimus, fortasse uere factum esse non credunt; aut quia non diu mansit alius eiusdem sideris cursus, sed reditum est ad solitum, minus isto mouentur exemplo. Habent ergo aliud, quod etiam nunc possit ostendi eisque puto debere sufficere, quo commoneantur, cum aliquid aduerterint in aliqua institutione naturae eamque sibi notissimam fecerint, non se inde Deo debere praescribere, quasi eam non possit in longe aliud, quam eis cognita est, uertere adque mutare. Terra Sodomorum non fuit utique ut nunc est, sed iacebat simili ceteris facie eademque uel etiam uberiore fecunditate pollebat; nam Dei paradiso in diuinis eloquiis conparata est. Haec postea quam tacta de caelo est, sicut illorum quoque adtestatur historia et nunc ab eis qui ueniunt ad loca illa conspicitur, prodigiosa fuligine horrori est et poma eius interiorem fauillam mendaci superficie maturitatis includunt. Ecce non erat talis, et talis est. Ecce a conditore naturarum natura eius in hanc foedissimam diuersitatem mirabili mutatione conuersa est; et quod post tam longum accidit tempus, tam longo tempore perseuerat. Sicut ergo non fuit inpossibile Deo, quas uoluit instituere, sic ei non est inpossibile, in quidquid uoluerit, quas instituit, mutare naturas. Unde illorum quoque miraculorum multitudo siluescit, quae monstra ostenta, portenta prodigia nuncupantur; quae recolere et commemorare si uelim, huius operis quis erit finis? Monstra sane dicta perhibent a monstrando, quod aliquid significando demonstrent, et ostenta ab ostendendo, et portenta a portendendo, id est praeostendendo, et prodigia, quod porro dicant, id est futura praedicant. Sed uiderint eorum coniectores, quo modo ex eis siue fallantur siue instinctu spirituum, quibus cura est tali poena dignos animos hominum noxiae curiositatis retibus inplicare, etiam uera praedicant, siue multa dicendo aliquando in aliquid ueritatis incurrant. Nobis tamen ista, quae uelut contra naturam fiunt et contra naturam fieri dicuntur (quo more hominum locutus est et apostolus dicendo contra naturam in olea insitum oleastrum factum esse participem pinguedinis oleae) et monstra ostenta, portenta prodigia nuncupantur, hoc monstrare debent, hoc ostendere uel praeostendere, hoc praedicere, quod facturus sit Deus, quae de corporibus hominum se praenuntiauit esse facturum, nulla inpediente difficultate, nulla praescribente lege naturae. Quo modo autem praenuntiauerit, satis in libro superiore docuisse me existimo, decerpendo de scripturis sanctis et nouis et ueteribus non quidem omnia ad hoc pertinentia, sed quae sufficere huic operi iudicaui.