--- title: "City of God · De civitate Dei" author: "Augustine" translator: "Marcus Dods" languages: [la, en] shelf: "Church Fathers" section: 34 of 116 url: https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/34/ cite: "Augustine, tr. Marcus Dods, City of God · De civitate Dei, section 34. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/34/" --- # City of God · De civitate Dei *Augustine, tr. Marcus Dods* “Two loves have made two cities.” Augustine’s Latin, in Hoffmann’s critical text, beside Dods’s English, chapter by chapter. > Latin: Augustine, De civitate Dei, ed. Emanuel Hoffmann, CSEL 40 (Vienna: Tempsky, 1899–1900), as encoded by the Open Greek and Latin project, University of Leipzig (stoa0040.stoa003.opp-lat3, CC BY-SA 4.0); apparatus omitted. > English: Marcus Dods, The City of God (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, first series, vol. 2, 1887). > Chapters are matched one to one except where the two editions divide them differently; within a chapter the Latin sentences are shared out over the English paragraphs by position. ## 34. That When Once the Vanity of the Gods of the Nations Has Been Exposed, It Cannot Be Doubted that They are Unable to Bestow Eternal Life on Any One, When They Cannot Afford Help Even with Respect to the Things Of this Temporal Life. Source: https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/34/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/augustine-city-of-god/34/#p-N [¶0] Chapter 12.—That When Once the Vanity of the Gods of the Nations Has Been Exposed, It Cannot Be Doubted that They are Unable to Bestow Eternal Life on Any One, When They Cannot Afford Help Even with Respect to the Things Of this Temporal Life. > Latin: Caput XII. Quod gentilium deorum uanitate detecta nequeat dubitari aeternam eos uitam nemini posse praestare, qui nec ipsam adiuuent temporalem. [¶1] Now, since there are three theologies, which the Greeks call respectively mythical, physical, and political, and which may be called in Latin fabulous, natural, and civil; and since neither from the fabulous, which even the worshippers of many and false gods have themselves most freely censured, nor from the civil, of which that is convicted of being a part, or even worse than it, can eternal life be hoped for from any of these theologies,—if any one thinks that what has been said in this book is not enough for him, let him also add to it the many and various dissertations concerning God as the giver of felicity, contained in the former books, especially the fourth one. > Latin: Nunc propter tres theologias, quas Graeci dicunt mythicen physicen politicen, Latine autem dici possunt fabulosa naturalis ciuilis, quod neque de fabulosa, quam et ipsi deorum multorum falsorumque cultores liberrime reprehenderunt, neque de ciuili, cuius illa pars esse conuincitur eiusque et ista simillima uel etiam deterior inuenitur, speranda est aeterna uita, si cui satis non sunt quae in hoc uolumine dicta sunt, adiungat etiam illa, quae in superioribus libris et maxime quarto de felicitatis datore Deo plurima disputata sunt. [¶2] For to what but to felicity should men consecrate themselves, were felicity a goddess? However, as it is not a goddess, but a gift of God, to what God but the giver of happiness ought we to consecrate ourselves, who piously love eternal life, in which there is true and full felicity? But I think, from what has been said, no one ought to doubt that none of those gods is the giver of happiness, who are worshipped with such shame, and who, if they are not so worshipped, are more shamefully enraged, and thus confess that they are most foul spirits. Moreover, how can he give eternal life who cannot give happiness? For we mean by eternal life that life where there is endless happiness. For if the soul live in eternal punishments, by which also those unclean spirits shall be tormented, that is rather eternal death than eternal life. For there is no greater or worse death than when death never dies. But because the soul from its very nature, being created immortal, cannot be without some kind of life, its utmost death is alienation from the life of God in an eternity of punishment. So, then, He only who gives true happiness gives eternal life, that is, an endlessly happy life. And since those gods whom this civil theology worships have been proved to be unable to give this happiness, they ought not to be worshipped on account of those temporal and terrestrial things, as we showed in the five former books, much less on account of eternal life, which is to be after death, as we have sought to show in this one book especially, whilst the other books also lend it their co-operation. But since the strength of inveterate habit has its roots very deep, if any one thinks that I have not disputed sufficiently to show that this civil theology ought to be rejected and shunned, let him attend to another book which, with God’s help, is to be joined to this one. > Latin: Nam cui nisi uni felicitati propter aeternam uitam consecrandi homines essent, si dea felicitas esset? Quia uero non dea, sed munus est dei: cui deo nisi datori felicitatis consecrandi sumus, qui aeternam uitam, ubi uera est et plena felicitas, pia caritate diligimus? Non autem esse datorem felicitatis quemquam istorum deorum, qui tanta turpitudine coluntur et. nisi ita colantur, multo turpius irascuntur adque ob hoc se spiritus inmundissimos confitentur, puto ex his, quae dicta sunt, neminem dubitare oportere. Porro qui non dat felicitatem, uitam quo modo dare posset aeternam? Eam quippe uitam aeternam dicimus, ubi est sine fine felicitas. Nam si anima in poenis uiuit aeternis, quibus et ipsi spiritus cruciabuntur inmundi. mors est illa potius aeterna quam uita. Nulla quippe maior et peior est mors, quam ubi non moritur mors. Sed quod animae natura, per id quod inmortalis creata est, sine qualicumque uita esse non potest, summa mors eius est alienatio a uita Dei in aeternitate supplicii. Vitam igitur aeternam, id est sine ullo fine felicem, solus ille dat, qui dat ueram felicitatem. Quam quoniam illi, quos colit theologia ista ciuilis, dare non posse conuicti sunt: non solum propter ista temporalia adque terrena, quod superioribus quinque libris ostendimus, sed multo magis propter uitam aeternam, quae post mortem futura est, quod isto uno etiam illis cooperantibus egimus, colendi non sunt. Sed quoniam ueternosae consuetudinis uis nimis in alto radices habet, si cui de ista ciuili theologia respuenda adque uitanda parum uideor disputasse, in aliud uolumen, quod huic opitulante Deo coniungendum est, animum intendat. ### Of the ‘select gods’ of the civil theology, and that eternal life is not obtained by worshipping them. [¶4] Book VII. > Latin: Liber VII [¶5] Argument—In this book it is shown that eternal life is not obtained by the worship of Janus, Jupiter, Saturn, and the other “select gods” of the civil theology. ### Preface [¶7] It will be the duty of those who are endowed with quicker and better understandings, in whose case the former books are sufficient, and more than sufficient, to effect their intended object, to bear with me with patience and equanimity whilst I attempt with more than ordinary diligence to tear up and eradicate depraved and ancient opinions hostile to the truth of piety, which the long-continued error of the human race has fixed very deeply in unenlightened minds; co-operating also in this, according to my little measure, with the grace of Him who, being the true God, is able to accomplish it, and on whose help I depend in my work; and, for the sake of others, such should not deem superfluous what they feel to be no longer necessary for themselves. A very great matter is at stake when the true and truly holy divinity is commended to men as that which they ought to seek after and to worship; not, however, on account of the transitory vapor of mortal life, but on account of life eternal, which alone is blessed, although the help necessary for this frail life we are now living is also afforded us by it. > Latin: Diligentius me prauas et ueteres opiniones ueritati pietatis inimicas, quas tenebrosis animis altius et tenacius diuturnus humani generis error infixit, euellere adque exstirpare conantem et illius gratiae, qui hoc ut uerus Deus potest, pro meo modulo in eius adiutorio cooperantem ingenia celeriora adque meliora, quibus ad hanc rem superiores libri satis superque sufficiunt, patienter et aequanimiter ferre debebunt et propter alios non putare superfluum, quod iam sibi sentiunt non necessarium. Multum magna res agitur, cum uera et uere sancta diuinitas, quamuis ab ea nobis etiam huic, quam nunc gerimus, fragilitati necessaria subsidia praebeantur, non tamen propter mortalis uitae transitorium uaporem, sed propter uitam beatam, quae non nisi aeterna est, quaerenda et colenda praedicatur. ### Whether, Since It is Evident that Deity is Not to Be Found in the Civil Theology, We are to Believe that It is to Be Found in the Select Gods. [¶9] Chapter 1.—Whether, Since It is Evident that Deity is Not to Be Found in the Civil Theology, We are to Believe that It is to Be Found in the Select Gods. > Latin: Caput I. An cum in theologia ciuili deitatem non esse constiterit, in selectis dis eam inueniri posse credendum sit. [¶10] If there is any one whom the sixth book, which I have last finished, has not persuaded that this divinity, or, so to speak, deity—for this word also our authors do not hesitate to use, in order to translate more accurately that which the Greeks call θεότης;—if there is any one, I say, whom the sixth book has not persuaded that this divinity or deity is not to be found in that theology which they call civil, and which Marcus Varro has explained in sixteen books,—that is, that the happiness of eternal life is not attainable through the worship of gods such as states have established to be worshipped, and that in such a form,—perhaps, when he has read this book, he will not have anything further to desire in order to the clearing up of this question. For it is possible that some one may think that at least the select and chief gods, whom Varro comprised in his last book, and of whom we have not spoken sufficiently, are to be worshipped on account of the blessed life, which is none other than eternal. In respect to which matter I do not say what Tertullian said, perhaps more wittily than truly, “If gods are selected like onions, certainly the rest are rejected as bad.” I do not say this, for I see that even from among the select, some are selected for some greater and more excellent office: as in warfare, when recruits have been elected, there are some again elected from among those for the performance of some greater military service; and in the church, when persons are elected to be overseers, certainly the rest are not rejected, since all good Christians are deservedly called elect; in the erection of a building corner-stones are elected, though the other stones, which are destined for other parts of the structure, are not rejected; grapes are elected for eating, whilst the others, which we leave for drinking, are not rejected. There is no need of adducing many illustrations, since the thing is evident. Wherefore the selection of certain gods from among many affords no proper reason why either he who wrote on this subject, or the worshippers of the gods, or the gods themselves, should be spurned. We ought rather to seek to know what gods these are, and for what purpose they may appear to have been selected. > Latin: Hanc diuinitatem uel, ut sic dixerim, deitatem (nam et hoc uerbo uti iam nostros non piget, ut de Graeco expressius transferant quod illi […] appellant) — hanc ergo diuinitatem siue deitatem non esse in ea theologia, quam ciuilem uocant, quae a Marco Varrone sedecim uoluminibus explicata est, id est non perueniri ad aeternae uitae felicitatem talium deorum cultu, quales a ciuitatibus qualiterque colendi instituti sunt, cui nondum persuasit sextus liber, quem proxime absoluimus, cum istum forsitan legerit, quid de hac quaestione expedienda ulterius desideret, non habebit. Fieri enim potest, ut saltem deos selectos adque praecipuos, quos Varro uolumine conplexus est ultimo, de quibus parum diximus, quisquam colendos propter uitam beatam, quae non nisi aeterna est, opinetur. Qua in re non dico quod facetius ait Tertullianus fortasse quam uerius: Si di eliguntur ut bulbi, utique ceteri reprobi iudicantur. Non hoc dico: uideo enim etiam ex selectis selegi aliquos ad aliquid maius adque praestantius, sicut in militia, cum tirones electi fuerint, ex his quoque eliguntur ad opus aliquod maius armorum; et cum eliguntur in ecclesia, qui fiant praepositi, non utique ceteri reprobantur, cum omnes boni fideles electi merito nuncupentur. Eliguntur in aedificio lapides angulares, non reprobatis ceteris, qui structurae partibus aliis deputantur. Eliguntur uuae ad uescendum, nec reprobantur aliae, quas relinquimus ad bibendum. Non opus est multa percurrere, cum res in aperto sit. Quam ob rem non ex hoc, quod di ex multis quidam selecti sunt, uel. is qui scripsit uel eorum cultores uel di ipsi uituperandi sunt, sed aduertendum potius quinam isti sint et ad quam rem selecti uideantur. ### Who are the Select Gods, and Whether They are Held to Be Exempt from the Offices of the Commoner Gods. [¶12] Chapter 2.—Who are the Select Gods, and Whether They are Held to Be Exempt from the Offices of the Commoner Gods. > Latin: Caput II. Qui sint di selecti, et an ab officiis uiliorum deorum habeantur excepti. [¶13] The following gods, certainly, Varro signalizes as select, devoting one book to this subject: Janus, Jupiter, Saturn, Genius, Mercury, Apollo, Mars, Vulcan, Neptune, Sol, Orcus, father Liber, Tellus, Ceres, Juno, Luna, Diana, Minerva, Venus, Vesta; of which twenty gods, twelve are males, and eight females. Whether are these deities called select, because of their higher spheres of administration in the world, or because they have become better known to the people, and more worship has been expended on them? If it be on account of the greater works which are performed by them in the world, we ought not to have found them among that, as it were, plebeian crowd of deities, which has assigned to it the charge of minute and trifling things. For, first of all, at the conception of a fœtus, from which point all the works commence which have been distributed in minute detail to many deities, Janus himself opens the way for the reception of the seed; there also is Saturn, on account of the seed itself; there is Liber, who liberates the male by the effusion of the seed; there is Libera, whom they also would have to be Venus, who confers this same benefit on the woman, namely, that she also be liberated by the emission of the seed;—all these are of the number of those who are called select. But there is also the goddess Mena, who presides over the menses; though the daughter of Jupiter, ignoble nevertheless. And this province of the menses the same author, in his book on the select gods, assigns to Juno herself, who is even queen among the select gods; and here, as Juno Lucina, along with the same Mena, her stepdaughter, she presides over the same blood. There also are two gods, exceedingly obscure, Vitumnus and Sentinus—the one of whom imparts life to the fœtus, and the other sensation; and, of a truth, they bestow, most ignoble though they be, far more than all those noble and select gods bestow. For, surely, without life and sensation, what is the whole fœtus which a woman carries in her womb, but a most vile and worthless thing, no better than slime and dust? > Latin: Hos certe deos selectos Varro unius libri contextione commendat: Ianum, Iouem, Saturnum, Genium, Mercurium, Apollinem, Martem, Vulcanum, Neptunum, Solem, Orcum, Liberum patrem, Tellurem, Cererem, Iunonem, Lunam, Dianam, Mineruam, Venerem, Vestam; in quibus omnibus ferme uiginti duodecim mares, octo sunt feminae. Haec numina utrum propter maiores in mundo administrationes selecta dicuntur, an quod populis magis innotuerunt maiorque est eis cultus exhibitus? Si propterea, quia opera maiora ab his administrantur in mundo, non eos inuenire debuimus inter illam quasi plebeiam numinum multitudinem minutis opusculis deputatam. Nam ipse primum Ianus, cum puerperium concipitur, unde illa cuncta opera sumunt exordium minutatim minutis distributa numinibus, aditum aperit recipiendo semini. Ibi est et Saturnus propter ipsum semen; ibi Liber, qui marem effuso semine liberat; ibi Libera, quam et Venerem uolunt, quae hoc idem beneficium conferat feminae, ut etiam ipsa emisso semine liberetur. Omnes hi ex illis sunt, qui selecti appellantur. Sed ibi est et dea Mena, quae menstruis fluoribus praeest, quamuis Iouis filia, tamen ignobilis. Et hanc prouinciam fluorum menstruorum in libro selectorum deorum ipsi Iunoni idem auctor adsignat, quae in dis selectis etiam regina est et hic tamquam Iuno Lucina cum eadem Mena priuigna sua eidem cruori praesidet. Ibi sunt et duo nescio qui obscurissimi, Vitumnus et Sentinus, quorum alter uitam, alter sensus puerperio largiuntur. Et nimirum multo plus praestant, cum sint ignobilissimi, quam illi tot proceres et selecti. Nam profecto sine uita et sensu, quid est illud totum, quod muliebri utero geritur, nisi nescio quid abiectissimum limo ac pulueri conparandum? ### How There is No Reason Which Can Be Shown for the Selection of Certain Gods, When the Administration of More Exalted Offices is Assigned to Many Inferior Gods. [¶15] Chapter 3.—How There is No Reason Which Can Be Shown for the Selection of Certain Gods, When the Administration of More Exalted Offices is Assigned to Many Inferior Gods. > Latin: Caput III. Quam nulla sit ratio, quae de selectione quorundam deorum possit ostendi, cum multis inferioribus excellentior administratio deputetur. [¶16] What is the cause, therefore, which has driven so many select gods to these very small works, in which they are excelled by Vitumnus and Sentinus, though little known and sunk in obscurity, inasmuch as they confer the munificent gifts of life and sensation? For the select Janus bestows an entrance, and, as it were, a door for the seed; the select Saturn bestows the seed itself; the select Liber bestows on men the emission of the same seed; Libera, who is Ceres or Venus, confers the same on women; the select Juno confers (not alone, but together with Mena, the daughter of Jupiter) the menses, for the growth of that which has been conceived; and the obscure and ignoble Vitumnus confers life, whilst the obscure and ignoble Sentinus confers sensation;—which two last things are as much more excellent than the others, as they themselves are excelled by reason and intellect. For as those things which reason and understand are preferable to those which, without intellect and reason, as in the case of cattle, live and feel; so also those things which have been endowed with life and sensation are deservedly preferred to those things which neither live nor feel. Therefore Vitumnus the life-giver, and Sentinus the sense-giver, ought to have been reckoned among the select gods, rather than Janus the admitter of seed, and Saturn the giver or sower of seed, and Liber and Libera the movers and liberators of seed; which seed is not worth a thought, unless it attain to life and sensation. Yet these select gifts are not given by select gods, but by certain unknown, and, considering their dignity, neglected gods. But if it be replied that Janus has dominion over all beginnings, and therefore the opening of the way for conception is not without reason assigned to him; and that Saturn has dominion over all seeds, and therefore the sowing of the seed whereby a human being is generated cannot be excluded from his operation; that Liber and Libera have power over the emission of all seeds, and therefore preside over those seeds which pertain to the procreation of men; that Juno presides over all purgations and births, and therefore she has also charge of the purgations of women and the births of human beings;—if they give this reply, let them find an answer to the question concerning Vitumnus and Sentinus, whether they are willing that these likewise should have dominion over all things which live and feel. If they grant this, let them observe in how sublime a position they are about to place them. For to spring from seeds is in the earth and of the earth, but to live and feel are supposed to be properties even of the sidereal gods. But if they say that only such things as come to life in flesh, and are supported by senses, are assigned to Sentinus, why does not that God who made all things live and feel, bestow on flesh also life and sensation, in the universality of His operation conferring also on fœtuses this gift? And what, then, is the use of Vitumnus and Sentinus? But if these, as it were, extreme and lowest things have been committed by Him who presides universally over life and sense to these gods as to servants, are these select gods then so destitute of servants, that they could not find any to whom even they might commit those things, but with all their dignity, for which they are, it seems, deemed worthy to be selected, were compelled to perform their work along with ignoble ones? Juno is select queen of the gods, and the sister and wife of Jupiter; nevertheless she is Iterduca, the conductor, to boys, and performs this work along with a most ignoble pair—the goddesses Abeona and Adeona. There they have also placed the goddess Mena, who gives to boys a good mind, and she is not placed among the select gods; as if anything greater could be bestowed on a man than a good mind. But Juno is placed among the select because she is Iterduca and Domiduca (she who conducts one on a journey, and who conducts him home again); as if it is of any advantage for one to make a journey, and to be conducted home again, if his mind is not good. And yet the goddess who bestows that gift has not been placed by the selectors among the select gods, though she ought indeed to have been preferred even to Minerva, to whom, in this minute distribution of work, they have allotted the memory of boys. For who will doubt that it is a far better thing to have a good mind, than ever so great a memory? For no one is bad who has a good mind; but some who are very bad are possessed of an admirable memory, and are so much the worse, the less they are able to forget the bad things which they think. And yet Minerva is among the select gods, whilst the goddess Mena is hidden by a worthless crowd. What shall I say concerning Virtus? What concerning Felicitas?—concerning whom I have already spoken much in the fourth book; to whom, though they held them to be goddesses, they have not thought fit to assign a place among the select gods, among whom they have given a place to Mars and Orcus, the one the causer of death, the other the receiver of the dead. > Latin: Quae igitur causa tot selectos deos ad haec opera minima conpulit, ubi a Vitumno et Sentino, quos fama obscura recondit, in huius munificentiae partitione superentur? Confert enim selectus Ianus aditum et quasi ianuam semini; confert selectus Saturnus semen ipsum; confert selectus Liber eiusdem seminis emissionem uiris; confert hoc idem Libera, quae Ceres seu Venus est, feminis; confert selecta Iuno, et hoc non sola, sed cum Mena, filia Iouis, fluores menstruos ad eius, quod conceptum est, incrementum: et confert Vitumnus obscurus et ignobilis uitam; confert Sentinus obscurus et ignobilis sensum; quae duo tanto illis rebus praestantiora sunt, quanto et ipsa intellectu ac ratione uincuntur. Sicut enim, quae ratiocinantur et intellegunt, profecto potiora sunt his, quae sine intellectu adque ratione ut pecora uiuunt et sentiunt: ita et illa, quae uita sensuque sunt praedita, his, quae nec uiuunt nec sentiunt, merito praeferuntur. Inter selectos itaque deos Vitumnus uiuificator et Sentinus sensificator magis haberi debuerunt quam Ianus seminis admissor et Saturnus seminis dator uel sator et Liber et Libera seminum commotores uel emissores; quae semina cogitare indignum est, nisi ad uitam sensumque peruenerint, quae munera selecta non dantur a dis selectis, sed a quibusdam incognitis et prae istorum dignitate neglectis. Quod si respondetur omnium initiorum potestatem habere Ianum et ideo illi etiam quod aperitur conceptui non inmerito adtribui, et omnium seminum Saturnum et ideo seminationem quoque hominis non posse ab eius operatione seiungi, omnium seminum emittendorum Liberum et Liberam et ideo his etiam praeesse. quae ad substituendos homines pertinent, omnium purgandorum et pariendorum Iunonem et ideo eam non deesse purgationibus feminarum et partubus hominum: quaerant quid respondeant de Vitumno et Sentino, utrum et ipsos uelint habere omnium quae uiuunt et sentiunt potestatem. Quod si concedunt, adtendant quam eos sublimius locaturi sint. Nam seminibus nasci in terra et ex terra est; uiuere autem adque sentire etiam deos sidereos opinantur. Si autem dicunt Vitumno adque Sentino haec sola adtributa, quae in carne uiuescunt et sensibus adminiculantur, quur non. deus ille, qui facit omnia uiuere adque sentire, etiam carni uitam praebet et sensum, uniuersali opere hoc munus etiam partubus tribuens? et quid opus est Vitumno adque Sentino? Quod si ab illo, qui uitae ac sensibus uniuersaliter praesidet, his quasi famulis ista carnalia uelut extrema et ima commissa sunt: itane sunt illi selecti destituti familia, ut non inuenirent quibus etiam ipsi ista committerent, sed cum tota sua nobilitate, qua uisi sunt seligendi, opus facere cum ignobilibus cogerentur? Iuno selecta et regina Iouisque et soror et coniunx; haec tamen Iterduca est pueris et opus facit cum deabus ignobilissimis Abeona et Adeona. Ibi posuerunt et Mentem deam, quae faciat pueris bonam mentem, et inter selectos ista non ponitur, quasi quidquam maius praestari homini potest; ponitur autem Iuno, quia Iterduca est et Domiduca, quasi quidquam prosit iter carpere et domum duci, si mens non est bona, cuius muneris deam selectores isti inter selecta numina minime posuerunt. Quae profecto et Mineruae fuerat praeferenda, cui per ista minuta opera puerorum memoriam tribuerunt. Quis enim dubitet multo esse melius habere bonam mentem quam memoriam quantumlibet ingentem? Nemo enim malus est, qui bonam habet mentem; quidam uero pessimi memoria sunt mirabili, tanto peiores quanto minus possunt quod male cogitant obliuisci. Et tamen Minerua est inter selectos deos; Mentem autem deam turba uilis operuit. Quid de Virtute dicam? quid de Felicitate? de quibus in quarto libro plura iam diximus; quas cum deas haberent, nullum eis locum inter selectos deos dare uoluerunt, ubi dederunt Marti et Orco, uni effectori mortium alteri receptori. [¶17] Since, therefore, we see that even the select gods themselves work together with the others, like a senate with the people, in all those minute works which have been minutely portioned out among many gods; and since we find that far greater and better things are administered by certain gods who have not been reckoned worthy to be selected than by those who are called select, it remains that we suppose that they were called select and chief, not on account of their holding more exalted offices in the world, but because it happened to them to become better known to the people. And even Varro himself says, that in that way obscurity had fallen to the lot of some father gods and mother goddesses, as it fails to the lot of man. If, therefore, Felicity ought not perhaps to have been put among the select gods, because they did not attain to that noble position by merit, but by chance, Fortune at least should have been placed among them, or rather before them; for they say that that goddess distributes to every one the gifts she receives, not according to any rational arrangement, but according as chance may determine. She ought to have held the uppermost place among the select gods, for among them chiefly it is that she shows what power she has. For we see that they have been selected not on account of some eminent virtue or rational happiness, but by that random power of Fortune which the worshippers of these gods think that she exerts. For that most eloquent man Sallust also may perhaps have the gods themselves in view when he says: “But, in truth, fortune rules in everything; it renders all things famous or obscure, according to caprice rather than according to truth.” For they cannot discover a reason why Venus should have been made famous, whilst Virtus has been made obscure, when the divinity of both of them has been solemnly recognized by them, and their merits are not to be compared. Again, if she has deserved a noble position on account of the fact that she is much sought after—for there are more who seek after Venus than after Virtus—why has Minerva been celebrated whilst Pecunia has been left in obscurity, although throughout the whole human race avarice allures a far greater number than skill? And even among those who are skilled in the arts, you will rarely find a man who does not practise his own art for the purpose of pecuniary gain; and that for the sake of which anything is made, is always valued more than that which is made for the sake of something else. If, then, this selection of gods has been made by the judgment of the foolish multitude, why has not the goddess Pecunia been preferred to Minerva, since there are many artificers for the sake of money? But if this distinction has been made by the few wise, why has Virtus been preferred to Venus, when reason by far prefers the former? At all events, as I have already said, Fortune herself—who, according to those who attribute most influence to her, renders all things famous or obscure according to caprice rather than according to the truth—since she has been able to exercise so much power even over the gods, as, according to her capricious judgment, to render those of them famous whom she would, and those obscure whom she would; Fortune herself ought to occupy the place of pre-eminence among the select gods, since over them also she has such pre-eminent power. Or must we suppose that the reason why she is not among the select is simply this, that even Fortune herself has had an adverse fortune? She was adverse, then, to herself, since, whilst ennobling others, she herself has remained obscure. > Latin: Cum igitur in his minutis operibus, quae minutatim dis pluribus distributa sunt, etiam ipsos selectos uideamus tamquam senatum cum plebe pariter operari, et inueniamus a quibusdam dis, qui nequaquam seligendi putati sunt, multa maiora adque meliora administrari quam ab illis, qui selecti uocantur: restat arbitrari non propter praestantiores in mundo administrationes, sed quia prouenit eis, ut magis populis innotescerent, selectos eos et praecipuos nuncupatos. Unde dicit etiam ipse Varro, quod dis quibusdam patribus et deabus matribus, sicut hominibus, ignobilitas accidisset. Si ergo Felicitas ideo fortasse inter selectos deos esse non debuit, quod ad istam nobilitatem non merito, sed fortuito peruenerunt: saltem inter illos uel potius prae illis Fortuna poneretur, quam dicunt deam non rationabili dispositione, sed ut temere acciderit, sua cuique dona conferre. Haec in dis selectis tenere apicem debuit, in quibus maxime quid posset ostendit; quando eos uidemus non praecipua uirtute, non rationabili felicitate, sed temeraria, sicut eorum cultores de illa sentiunt, Fortunae potestate selectos. Nam et uir disertissimus Sallustius etiam ipsos deos fortassis adtendit, cum diceret: ‘Sed profecto fortuna in omni re dominatur; ea res cunctas ex libidine magis quam ex uero celebrat obscuratque.’ Non enim possunt inuenire causam, quur celebrata sit Venus et obscurata sit Virtus, cum ambarum ab istis consecrata sint numina nec conparanda sint merita. Aut si hoc nobilitari meruit, quod plures adpetunt, plures enim Venerem quam Virtutem: quur celebrata est dea Minerua et obscurata est dea Pecunia? cum in genere humano plures adliciat auaritia quam peritia, et in eis ipsis, qui sunt artificiosi, raro inuenias hominem, qui non habeat artem suam pecuniaria mercede uenalem, plurisque pendatur semper propter quod aliquid fit, quam id quod propter aliud fit. Si ergo insipientis iudicio multitudinis facta est deorum ista selectio, quur dea Pecunia Mineruae praelata non est, cum propter pecuniam sint artifices multi? Si autem paucorum sapientium est ista distinctio, quur non praelata est Veneri Virtus, cum eam longe praeferat ratio? Saltem certe, ut dixi, ipsa Fortuna, quae, sicut putant qui ei plurimum tribuunt, in omni re dominatur et res cunctas ex libidine magis quam ex uero celebrat obscuratque, si tantum et in deos ualuit, ut temerario iudicio suo quos uellet celebraret obscuraretque quos uellet, praecipuum locum haberet in selectis, quae in ipsos quoque deos tam praecipuae est potestatis. An ut illic esse non posset, nihil aliud etiam ipsa Fortuna nisi aduersam putanda est habuisse fortunam? Sibi ergo aduersata est, quae alios nobiles faciens nobilitata non est. ### The Inferior Gods, Whose Names are Not Associated with Infamy, Have Been Better Dealt with Than the Select Gods, Whose Infamies are Celebrated. [¶19] Chapter 4.—The Inferior Gods, Whose Names are Not Associated with Infamy, Have Been Better Dealt with Than the Select Gods, Whose Infamies are Celebrated. > Latin: Caput IV. Melius actum cum dis inferioribus, qui nullis infamentur obprobriis, quam cum selectis, quorum tantae turpitudines celebrentur. [¶20] However, any one who eagerly seeks for celebrity and renown, might congratulate those select gods, and call them fortunate, were it not that he saw that they have been selected more to their injury than to their honor. For that low crowd of gods have been protected by their very meanness and obscurity from being overwhelmed with infamy. We laugh, indeed, when we see them distributed by the mere fiction of human opinions, according to the special works assigned to them, like those who farm small portions of the public revenue, or like workmen in the street of the silversmiths, where one vessel, in order that it may go out perfect, passes through the hands of many, when it might have been finished by one perfect workman. But the only reason why the combined skill of many workmen was thought necessary, was, that it is better that each part of an art should be learned by a special workman, which can be done speedily and easily, than that they should all be compelled to be perfect in one art throughout all its parts, which they could only attain slowly and with difficulty. Nevertheless there is scarcely to be found one of the non-select gods who has brought infamy on himself by any crime, whilst there is scarce any one of the select gods who has not received upon himself the brand of notable infamy. These latter have descended to the humble works of the others, whilst the others have not come up to their sublime crimes. Concerning Janus, there does not readily occur to my recollection anything infamous; and perhaps he was such an one as lived more innocently than the rest, and further removed from misdeeds and crimes. He kindly received and entertained Saturn when he was fleeing; he divided his kingdom with his guest, so that each of them had a city for himself, the one Janiculum, and the other Saturnia. But those seekers after every kind of unseemliness in the worship of the gods have disgraced him, whose life they found to be less disgracful than that of the other gods, with an image of monstrous deformity, making it sometimes with two faces, and sometimes, as it were, double, with four faces. Did they wish that, as the most of the select gods had lost shame through the perpetration of shameful crimes, his greater innocence should be marked by a greater number of faces? > Latin: Gratularetur autem dis istis selectis quisquam nobilitatis et claritudinis adpetitor et eos diceret fortunatos, si non eos magis ad iniurias quam ad honores selectos uideret. Nam illam infimam turbam ipsa ignobilitas texit, ne obrueretur obprobriis. Ridemus quidem, cum eos uidemus figmentis humanarum opinionum partitis inter se operibus distributos, tamquam minuscularios uectigalium conductores uel tamquam opifices in uico argentario, ubi unum uasculum, ut perfectum exeat, per multos artifices transit, cum ab uno perfecto perfici posset. Sed aliter non putatum est operantium multitudini consulendum, nisi ut singulas artis partes cito ac facile discerent singuli, ne omnes in arte una tarde ac difficile cogerentur esse perfecti. Verum tamen uix quisquam reperitur deorum non selectorum, qui aliquo crimine famam traxit infamem; uix autem selectorum quispiam, qui non in se notam contumeliae insignis acceperit. Illi ad istorum humilia opera descenderunt, isti in illorum sublimia crimina non uenerunt. De Iano quidem non mihi facile quidquam occurrit, quod ad probrum pertineat. Et fortasse talis fuerit, innocentius uixerit et a facinoribus flagitiisque remotius. Saturnum fugientem benignus excepit; cum hospite partitus est regnum, ut etiam ciuitates singulas conderent, iste laniculum, ille Saturniam. Sed isti in cultu deorum omnis dedecoris adpetitores, cuius uitam minus turpem inuenerunt, eum simulacri monstrosa deformitate turparunt, nunc eum bifrontem, nunc etiam quadrifrontem, tamquam geminum, facientes. An forte uoluerunt, ut, quoniam plurimi di selecti erubescenda perpetrando amiserant frontem, quanto iste innocentior esset, tanto frontosior appareret? ### Concerning the More Secret Doctrine of the Pagans, and Concerning the Physical Interpretations. [¶22] Chapter 5.—Concerning the More Secret Doctrine of the Pagans, and Concerning the Physical Interpretations. > Latin: Caput V. De paganorum secretiore doctrina physicisque rationibus. [¶23] But let us hear their own physical interpretations by which they attempt to color, as with the appearance of profounder doctrine, the baseness of most miserable error. Varro, in the first place, commends these interpretations so strongly as to say, that the ancients invented the images, badges, and adornments of the gods, in order that when those who went to the mysteries should see them with their bodily eyes, they might with the eyes of their mind see the soul of the world, and its parts, that is, the true gods; and also that the meaning which was intended by those who made their images with the human form, seemed to be this,—namely, that the mind of mortals, which is in a human body, is very like to the immortal mind, just as vessels might be placed to represent the gods, as, for instance, a wine-vessel might be placed in the temple of Liber, to signify wine, that which is contained being signified by that which contains. Thus by an image which had the human form the rational soul was signified, because the human form is the vessel, as it were, in which that nature is wont to be contained which they attribute to God, or to the gods. These are the mysteries of doctrine to which that most learned man penetrated in order that he might bring them forth to the light. But, O thou most acute man, hast thou lost among those mysteries that prudence which led thee to form the sober opinion, that those who first established those images for the people took away fear from the citizens and added error, and that the ancient Romans honored the gods more chastely without images? For it was through consideration of them that thou wast emboldened to speak these things against the later Romans. For if those most ancient Romans also had worshipped images, perhaps thou wouldst have suppressed by the silence of fear all those sentiments (true sentiments, nevertheless) concerning the folly of setting up images, and wouldst have extolled more loftily, and more loquaciously, those mysterious doctrines consisting of these vain and pernicious fictions. Thy soul, so learned and so clever (and for this I grieve much for thee), could never through these mysteries have reached its God; that is, the God by whom, not with whom, it was made, of whom it is not a part, but a work,—that God who is not the soul of all things, but who made every soul, and in whose light alone every soul is blessed, if it be not ungrateful for His grace. > Latin: Sed ipsorum potius interpretationes physicas audiamus, quibus turpitudinem miserrimi erroris uelut altioris doctrinae specie colorare conantur. Primum eas interpretationes sic Varro commendat, ut dicat antiquos simulacra deorum et insignia ornatusque finxisse, quae cum oculis animaduertissent hi, qui adissent doctrinae mysteria, possent animam mundi ac partes eius, id est deos ueros, animo uidere; quorum qui simulacra specie hominis fecerunt, hoc uideri secutos, quod mortalium animus, qui est in corpore humano, simillimus est inmortalis animi; tamquam si uasa ponerentur causa notandorum deorum et in Liberi aede oenophorum sisteretur, quod significaret uinum, per id quod continet id quod continetur; ita per simulacrum, quod formam haberet humanam, significari animam rationalem, quod eo uelut uase natura ista soleat contineri, cuius naturae deum uolunt esse uel deos. Haec sunt mysteria doctrinae, quae iste uir doctissimus penetrauerat, unde in lucem ista proferret. Sed, o homo acutissime, num in istis doctrinae mysteriis illam prudentiam perdidisti, qua tibi sobrie uisum est, quod hi, qui primi populis simulacra constituerunt, et metum demserunt ciuibus suis et errorem addiderunt, castiusque deos sine simulacris ueteres obseruasse Romanos? Hi enim tibi fuerunt auctores, ut haec contra posteriores Romanos dicere auderes. Nam si et illi antiquissimi simulacra coluissent, fortassis totum istum sensum de simulacris non constituendis, interim uerum, timoris silentio premeres et in huiusce modi perniciosis uanisque figmentis mysteria ista doctrinae loquacius et elatius praedicares. Anima tua tamen tam docta et ingeniosa (ubi te multum dolemus) per haec mysteria doctrinae ad Deum suum, id est a quo facta est, non cum quo facta est; nec cuius portio, sed cuius conditio est; nec qui est omnium anima, sed qui fecit omnem animam, quo solo inlustrante anima fit beata, si eius gratiae non sit ingrata, nullo modo potuit peruenire. [¶24] But the things which follow in this book will show what is the nature of these mysteries, and what value is to be set upon them. Meanwhile, this most learned man confesses as his opinion that the soul of the world and its parts are the true gods, from which we perceive that his theology (to wit, that same natural theology to which he pays great regard) has been able, in its completeness, to extend itself even to the nature of the rational soul. For in this book (concerning the select gods) he says a very few things by anticipation concerning the natural theology; and we shall see whether he has been able in that book, by means of physical interpretations, to refer to this natural theology that civil theology, concerning which he wrote last when treating of the select gods. Now, if he has been able to do this, the whole is natural; and in that case, what need was there for distinguishing so carefully the civil from the natural? But if it has been distinguished by a veritable distinction, then, since not even this natural theology with which he is so much pleased is true (for though it has reached as far as the soul, it has not reached to the true God who made the soul), how much more contemptible and false is that civil theology which is chiefly occupied about what is corporeal, as will be shown by its very interpretations, which they have with such diligence sought out and enucleated, some of which I must necessarily mention! > Latin: Verum ista mysteria doctrinae qualia sint quantique pendenda, quae sequuntur ostendent. Fatetur interim uir iste doctissimus animam mundi ac partes eius esse ueros deos; unde intellegitur totam eius theologian, eam ipsam scilicet naturalem, cui plurimum tribuit, usque ad animae rationalis naturam se extendere potuisse. De naturali enim paucissima praeloquitur in hoc libro, quem de dis selectis ultimum scripsit; in quo uidebimus utrum per interpretationes physiologicas possit ad hanc naturalem referre ciuilem. Quod si potuerit, tota naturalis erit: et quid opus erat ab ea ciuilem tanta cura distinctionis abiungere? Si autem recto discrimine separata est: quando nec ista uera est quae illi naturalis placet (peruenit enim usque ad animam, non usque ad uerum Deum qui fecit et animam), quanto est abiectior et falsior ista ciuilis, quae maxime circa corporum est occupata naturam, sicut ipsae interpretationes eius, ex quibus quaedam necessaria commemorare me oportet, tanta ab ipsis exquisitae et enucleatae diligentia demonstrabunt.