Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To Constantine.—Part I. 第十六章 从尼禄到君士坦丁对基督徒的态度——第一节
VOLUME TWO
第二卷
Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To Constantine.—Part I.
第十六章 从尼禄到君士坦丁对基督徒的态度——第一节
The Conduct Of The Roman Government Towards The Christians, From The Reign Of Nero To That Of Constantine. 1111
罗马政府自尼禄之朝至君士坦丁之朝对待基督徒的态度。1111
If we seriously consider the purity of the Christian religion, the sanctity of its moral precepts, and the innocent as well as austere lives of the greater number of those who during the first ages embraced the faith of the gospel, we should naturally suppose, that so benevolent a doctrine would have been received with due reverence, even by the unbelieving world; that the learned and the polite, however they may deride the miracles, would have esteemed the virtues, of the new sect; and that the magistrates, instead of persecuting, would have protected an order of men who yielded the most passive obedience to the laws, though they declined the active cares of war and government. If, on the other hand, we recollect the universal toleration of Polytheism, as it was invariably maintained by the faith of the people, the incredulity of philosophers, and the policy of the Roman senate and emperors, we are at a loss to discover what new offence the Christians had committed, what new provocation could exasperate the mild indifference of antiquity, and what new motives could urge the Roman princes, who beheld without concern a thousand forms of religion subsisting in peace under their gentle sway, to inflict a severe punishment on any part of their subjects, who had chosen for themselves a singular but an inoffensive mode of faith and worship.
倘若我们平心细想基督教信仰之纯洁、道德训诫之圣洁,以及初世纪皈依福音者大多既清白无辜又刻苦自持,本会自然地料想:如此仁厚的教义,纵是尚未信奉的世人,也当以应有的敬意来接纳;有学问、有教养之士纵然讥笑其神迹,也仍会敬重这一新教派的德行;至于官府,本当保护而非迫害这样一群人——他们对法律唯命是从、绝无违抗,只是不愿去操心战争与治理之事。可是另一方面,倘若我们回想多神教向来何等宽容一切:民众虔诚信奉、哲人不以为然、罗马元老院与历代皇帝的政策也一贯听任,那么我们便百思不得其解:基督徒究竟犯了什么新罪,什么新的挑衅竟能激怒古人那份温和的漠然,又有什么新的动机,能促使罗马诸帝去严惩自己的臣民?要知道,千百种宗教在他们宽仁的治下相安无事,他们向来视若无睹、毫不介怀,而基督徒不过是为自己选了一种别致却与人无害的信仰与礼拜方式罢了。
The religious policy of the ancient world seems to have assumed a more stern and intolerant character, to oppose the progress of Christianity. About fourscore years after the death of Christ, his innocent disciples were punished with death by the sentence of a proconsul of the most amiable and philosophic character, and according to the laws of an emperor distinguished by the wisdom and justice of his general administration. The apologies which were repeatedly addressed to the successors of Trajan are filled with the most pathetic complaints, that the Christians, who obeyed the dictates, and solicited the liberty, of conscience, were alone, among all the subjects of the Roman empire, excluded from the common benefits of their auspicious government. The deaths of a few eminent martyrs have been recorded with care; and from the time that Christianity was invested with the supreme power, the governors of the church have been no less diligently employed in displaying the cruelty, than in imitating the conduct, of their Pagan adversaries. To separate (if it be possible) a few authentic as well as interesting facts from an undigested mass of fiction and error, and to relate, in a clear and rational manner, the causes, the extent, the duration, and the most important circumstances of the persecutions to which the first Christians were exposed, is the design of the present chapter. 1222
古代世界的宗教政策,似乎正是为了阻遏基督教的传播,才平添了几分严厉与不容异己。基督死后约八十年,他那些清白无辜的门徒竟被判处死刑,下此判决的总督,人品最为和蔼、又富哲人气度,所依据的法律,则出自一位以施政明智公正著称的皇帝之手。此后一再呈递给图拉真历代继位者的护教辞,满纸都是最令人恻然的哀诉:基督徒只是遵从良心的指令、恳求良心的自由,却在罗马帝国的所有臣民中独遭排斥,无缘分享这吉庆政府所普施的恩泽。少数杰出殉道者之死,后人已详加记载;而自基督教一朝手握至高权柄,教会的当权者便一面尽力揭露异教对手的残忍,一面又同样卖力地效法其行径。若可能,从一堆未经甄别、真伪杂陈的虚构与谬误中,理出若干既确凿又饶有意味的史实,并以清晰而合乎理性的方式,叙述初代基督徒所遭迫害的缘由、范围、时长及其中最要紧的情节——这便是本章的宗旨。1222
The sectaries of a persecuted religion, depressed by fear animated with resentment, and perhaps heated by enthusiasm, are seldom in a proper temper of mind calmly to investigate, or candidly to appreciate, the motives of their enemies, which often escape the impartial and discerning view even of those who are placed at a secure distance from the flames of persecution. A reason has been assigned for the conduct of the emperors towards the primitive Christians, which may appear the more specious and probable as it is drawn from the acknowledged genius of Polytheism. It has already been observed, that the religious concord of the world was principally supported by the implicit assent and reverence which the nations of antiquity expressed for their respective traditions and ceremonies. It might therefore be expected, that they would unite with indignation against any sect or people which should separate itself from the communion of mankind, and claiming the exclusive possession of divine knowledge, should disdain every form of worship, except its own, as impious and idolatrous. The rights of toleration were held by mutual indulgence: they were justly forfeited by a refusal of the accustomed tribute. As the payment of this tribute was inflexibly refused by the Jews, and by them alone, the consideration of the treatment which they experienced from the Roman magistrates, will serve to explain how far these speculations are justified by facts, and will lead us to discover the true causes of the persecution of Christianity.
遭受迫害的教派信徒,既因恐惧而消沉,又因怨愤而激奋,或许还被狂热烧灼了头脑,很少能保持冷静公允的心境,去从容探究、平心评判其仇敌的动机;这些动机,即便是站在迫害烈焰之外、身处安全之地的公正明察者,也每每难以看透。有人为诸帝对待初代基督徒的行径给出过一种解释,因其取材于世所公认的多神教特性,故而显得格外言之成理、颇有几分可信。前文已经说过,世间宗教之所以能够和睦相处,主要靠的是古代各民族对各自传统与礼仪那种不言而喻的认同与敬奉。照此看来,人们本可预料:一旦有某个教派或民族自绝于人类共同的信仰之外,声称唯独自己掌握着神圣的真知,并鄙弃自身以外的一切礼拜方式,斥之为亵渎与偶像崇拜,众人便会同仇敌忾、群起而攻之。宽容之权,本以彼此相让为基;一旦拒付惯例应尽的敬意,此权也就理所当然地丧失了。既然唯独犹太人始终顽固拒付这份敬意,那么考察一下他们从罗马官府所受的待遇,便可看清这些推论在多大程度上为事实所印证,并引导我们发现迫害基督教的真正缘由。
Without repeating what has already been mentioned of the reverence of the Roman princes and governors for the temple of Jerusalem, we shall only observe, that the destruction of the temple and city was accompanied and followed by every circumstance that could exasperate the minds of the conquerors, and authorize religious persecution by the most specious arguments of political justice and the public safety. From the reign of Nero to that of Antoninus Pius, the Jews discovered a fierce impatience of the dominion of Rome, which repeatedly broke out in the most furious massacres and insurrections. Humanity is shocked at the recital of the horrid cruelties which they committed in the cities of Egypt, of Cyprus, and of Cyrene, where they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting natives; 1 and we are tempted to applaud the severe retaliation which was exercised by the arms of the legions against a race of fanatics, whose dire and credulous superstition seemed to render them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman government, but of human kind. 2 The enthusiasm of the Jews was supported by the opinion, that it was unlawful for them to pay taxes to an idolatrous master; and by the flattering promise which they derived from their ancient oracles, that a conquering Messiah would soon arise, destined to break their fetters, and to invest the favorites of heaven with the empire of the earth. It was by announcing himself as their long-expected deliverer, and by calling on all the descendants of Abraham to assert the hope of Israel, that the famous Barchochebas collected a formidable army, with which he resisted during two years the power of the emperor Hadrian. 3
罗马诸帝与总督对耶路撒冷圣殿何等敬重,前文已述,此处不再重复;我们只想指出:圣殿与圣城的毁灭,伴随并接踵而来的种种情形,桩桩件件都足以激怒征服者,并以政治正义与公共安全这类最堂皇的理由,为宗教迫害张目。从尼禄到安敦尼·庇护两朝之间,犹太人对罗马的统治表现出一种桀骜难驯的不耐,屡屡爆发为最疯狂的屠杀与起义。他们在埃及、塞浦路斯和昔兰尼诸城中犯下的骇人暴行,读来令人发指——他们本与毫无戒心的当地居民貌合神离、佯装亲善,却下此毒手;1 于是我们几乎要为军团挥师施行的严厉报复喝彩:这群狂徒的凶险迷信与轻信盲从,仿佛使他们不仅成了罗马政府的死敌,更成了全人类的死敌。2 支撑犹太人这股狂热的,一是他们认为向拜偶像的主子纳税乃是违法;二是他们从古老神谕中所得的诱人许诺——不久将有一位征服四方的弥赛亚兴起,注定要砸碎他们的锁链,把统治大地的权柄授予上天的宠儿。正是靠着自称是他们久盼的救主,并号召亚伯拉罕的一切子孙起来维护以色列的希望,那位大名鼎鼎的巴尔·科赫巴才纠集起一支劲旅,凭之与皇帝哈德良的兵力周旋达两年之久。3
Notwithstanding these repeated provocations, the resentment of the Roman princes expired after the victory; nor were their apprehensions continued beyond the period of war and danger. By the general indulgence of polytheism, and by the mild temper of Antoninus Pius, the Jews were restored to their ancient privileges, and once more obtained the permission of circumcising their children, with the easy restraint, that they should never confer on any foreign proselyte that distinguishing mark of the Hebrew race. 4 The numerous remains of that people, though they were still excluded from the precincts of Jerusalem, were permitted to form and to maintain considerable establishments both in Italy and in the provinces, to acquire the freedom of Rome, to enjoy municipal honors, and to obtain at the same time an exemption from the burdensome and expensive offices of society. The moderation or the contempt of the Romans gave a legal sanction to the form of ecclesiastical police which was instituted by the vanquished sect. The patriarch, who had fixed his residence at Tiberias, was empowered to appoint his subordinate ministers and apostles, to exercise a domestic jurisdiction, and to receive from his dispersed brethren an annual contribution. 5 New synagogues were frequently erected in the principal cities of the empire; and the sabbaths, the fasts, and the festivals, which were either commanded by the Mosaic law, or enjoined by the traditions of the Rabbis, were celebrated in the most solemn and public manner. 6 Such gentle treatment insensibly assuaged the stern temper of the Jews. Awakened from their dream of prophecy and conquest, they assumed the behavior of peaceable and industrious subjects. Their irreconcilable hatred of mankind, instead of flaming out in acts of blood and violence, evaporated in less dangerous gratifications. They embraced every opportunity of overreaching the idolaters in trade; and they pronounced secret and ambiguous imprecations against the haughty kingdom of Edom. 7
尽管一再受此挑衅,罗马诸帝的怨恨却随着胜利而消散,戒惧之心也未曾延续到战争与危险的时期之外。多神教一贯宽纵,加之安敦尼·庇护性情温和,犹太人遂恢复了昔日的特权,再度获准为子女行割礼,只受一条轻微的约束:绝不可把这希伯来族的标记加于任何外邦皈依者身上。4 这个民族尚存的众多遗民,虽仍被逐出耶路撒冷城界,却获准在意大利和各行省建立并维持颇具规模的聚居区,取得罗马公民权,享有市镇荣职,同时又豁免了社会上那些繁重而耗费的公职。罗马人或出于宽容、或出于轻蔑,竟以法律认可了这个败亡教派所自设的教务管理体制。定居提比里亚的族长获权任命属下的司职人员与使者,行使内部的裁断权,并向散居各地的教胞征收年贡。5 帝国各主要城市里新的会堂频频落成;无论是摩西律法所规定的、还是拉比传统所嘱咐的安息日、斋戒与节庆,都以最庄严而公开的方式举行。6 这般温和的待遇,不知不觉平息了犹太人那份严酷的脾性。他们从预言与征服的迷梦中醒来,摆出了安分守己、勤于生业的臣民姿态。他们那对人类难以化解的仇恨,不再迸发为流血与暴行,而是消解在一些不那么危险的快意之中。他们抓住一切机会在生意上算计拜偶像者,并对那傲慢的以东之国暗地里念些含混不清的诅咒。7
Since the Jews, who rejected with abhorrence the deities adored by their sovereign and by their fellow-subjects, enjoyed, however, the free exercise of their unsocial religion, there must have existed some other cause, which exposed the disciples of Christ to those severities from which the posterity of Abraham was exempt. The difference between them is simple and obvious; but, according to the sentiments of antiquity, it was of the highest importance. The Jews were a nation; the Christians were a sect: and if it was natural for every community to respect the sacred institutions of their neighbors, it was incumbent on them to persevere in those of their ancestors. The voice of oracles, the precepts of philosophers, and the authority of the laws, unanimously enforced this national obligation. By their lofty claim of superior sanctity the Jews might provoke the Polytheists to consider them as an odious and impure race. By disdaining the intercourse of other nations, they might deserve their contempt. The laws of Moses might be for the most part frivolous or absurd; yet, since they had been received during many ages by a large society, his followers were justified by the example of mankind; and it was universally acknowledged, that they had a right to practise what it would have been criminal in them to neglect. But this principle, which protected the Jewish synagogue, afforded not any favor or security to the primitive church. By embracing the faith of the gospel, the Christians incurred the supposed guilt of an unnatural and unpardonable offence. They dissolved the sacred ties of custom and education, violated the religious institutions of their country, and presumptuously despised whatever their fathers had believed as true, or had reverenced as sacred. Nor was this apostasy (if we may use the expression) merely of a partial or local kind; since the pious deserter who withdrew himself from the temples of Egypt or Syria, would equally disdain to seek an asylum in those of Athens or Carthage. Every Christian rejected with contempt the superstitions of his family, his city, and his province. The whole body of Christians unanimously refused to hold any communion with the gods of Rome, of the empire, and of mankind. It was in vain that the oppressed believer asserted the inalienable rights of conscience and private judgment. Though his situation might excite the pity, his arguments could never reach the understanding, either of the philosophic or of the believing part of the Pagan world. To their apprehensions, it was no less a matter of surprise, that any individuals should entertain scruples against complying with the established mode of worship, than if they had conceived a sudden abhorrence to the manners, the dress, 8111 or the language of their native country. 8
既然犹太人厌恶地拒不承认其君主与同胞所敬奉的神明,却仍能自由奉行其孤僻不群的宗教,那么必定另有缘由,才使基督的门徒遭受了亚伯拉罕后裔得以幸免的那些严酷。两者之别既简单又明显,但依古人的观念,此别却关系至大。犹太人是一个民族,基督徒则是一个教派;倘若各群体尊重邻邦的神圣制度乃是人之常情,那么恪守本族祖先的制度更是他们分内之责。神谕之声、哲人之训、法律之权威,无不异口同声地强调这一民族义务。犹太人以自命超凡圣洁的高傲姿态,或许招致多神教徒把他们视为可憎而不洁的种族;他们不屑与他族往来,或许也难怪遭人鄙夷。摩西的律法固然大多琐屑或荒诞,可既已被一个庞大社会世代奉行,其信徒便有全人类的先例为其正名;世人也一致公认:他们有权奉行这些律法——若加以废弃,反倒是他们的罪过。然而这条庇护犹太会堂的原则,却丝毫不能给初代教会以任何优容或庇护。基督徒因皈依福音,便背上了一桩被视为悖逆天性、不可宽恕的罪愆。他们斩断了习俗与教养的神圣纽带,破坏了本国的宗教制度,狂妄地蔑视先辈所笃信为真、所崇奉为圣的一切。而且这种背教(如果可以这样说的话)绝非局部或一地之事:一个虔诚的叛离者既已弃绝埃及或叙利亚的神庙,也同样不屑到雅典或迦太基的神庙去寻求庇护。每一个基督徒都轻蔑地摒弃了自己家族、城邦与行省的迷信。全体基督徒众口一词,拒绝与罗马的、帝国的、乃至全人类的诸神有任何往来。受压迫的信徒纵然申言良心与个人判断乃不可剥夺之权,也终究枉然。他的处境或能激起同情,他的论据却永远无法说服异教世界——无论是其中崇尚哲理的一派,还是笃信神明的一派。在他们看来,竟有人对遵行既定的礼拜方式心存顾虑,其令人诧异之处,不亚于此人忽然厌恶起本乡的风俗、衣着8111或语言来。8
The surprise of the Pagans was soon succeeded by resentment; and the most pious of men were exposed to the unjust but dangerous imputation of impiety. Malice and prejudice concurred in representing the Christians as a society of atheists, who, by the most daring attack on the religious constitution of the empire, had merited the severest animadversion of the civil magistrate. They had separated themselves (they gloried in the confession) from every mode of superstition which was received in any part of the globe by the various temper of polytheism: but it was not altogether so evident what deity, or what form of worship, they had substituted to the gods and temples of antiquity. The pure and sublime idea which they entertained of the Supreme Being escaped the gross conception of the Pagan multitude, who were at a loss to discover a spiritual and solitary God, that was neither represented under any corporeal figure or visible symbol, nor was adored with the accustomed pomp of libations and festivals, of altars and sacrifices. 9 The sages of Greece and Rome, who had elevated their minds to the contemplation of the existence and attributes of the First Cause, were induced by reason or by vanity to reserve for themselves and their chosen disciples the privilege of this philosophical devotion. 10 They were far from admitting the prejudices of mankind as the standard of truth, but they considered them as flowing from the original disposition of human nature; and they supposed that any popular mode of faith and worship which presumed to disclaim the assistance of the senses, would, in proportion as it receded from superstition, find itself incapable of restraining the wanderings of the fancy, and the visions of fanaticism. The careless glance which men of wit and learning condescended to cast on the Christian revelation, served only to confirm their hasty opinion, and to persuade them that the principle, which they might have revered, of the Divine Unity, was defaced by the wild enthusiasm, and annihilated by the airy speculations, of the new sectaries. The author of a celebrated dialogue, which has been attributed to Lucian, whilst he affects to treat the mysterious subject of the Trinity in a style of ridicule and contempt, betrays his own ignorance of the weakness of human reason, and of the inscrutable nature of the divine perfections. 11
异教徒的诧异很快转为怨恨;最虔诚的人反而背上了不敬神明这一既不公正又极其危险的罪名。恶意与偏见沆瀣一气,把基督徒说成一伙无神论者,说他们对帝国的宗教根基发动了最放肆的攻击,理应受到官府最严厉的惩处。基督徒确曾自绝于世上任何角落、任何多神教流派所奉行的一切迷信方式——这一点他们供认不讳,甚且引以为荣;然而他们究竟以何种神明、何种礼拜取代了古来的诸神与神庙,却并不那么一目了然。他们心中那纯洁而崇高的至高神观念,异教群氓粗鄙的头脑根本无从领会:他们茫然不解,怎会有这样一位纯灵而独一的神——既无任何形体或可见的象征来表现,又不以奠酒、节庆、祭坛与牺牲这惯常的排场来供奉。9 希腊与罗马的哲人虽已把心智提升到思索第一因的存在及其属性,却或出于理性、或出于自负,把这种哲理式虔敬的特权,只留给自己和精选的门徒。10 他们远不肯把众人的成见奉为真理的准绳,却认为这些成见源于人性本初的禀赋;并进而推想:任何一种胆敢摒弃感官助力的通俗信仰与礼拜,越是远离迷信,便越发无力约束想象的驰骋与狂热的幻象。有才识、有学问之士对基督教的启示不过屈尊一瞥、漫不经心,这一瞥反倒印证了他们仓促的成见,使他们确信:神之独一这条原则本来或许值得他们敬重,如今却被新教派信徒的狂热所玷污、被其虚妄的玄想所抹杀。有一篇归在琉善名下的著名对话录,其作者一面装模作样地以嘲讽轻蔑的笔调去谈论三位一体这一深奥题目,一面却暴露了自己对人类理性之软弱、以及神性完美之不可测度何等无知。11
It might appear less surprising, that the founder of Christianity should not only be revered by his disciples as a sage and a prophet, but that he should be adored as a God. The Polytheists were disposed to adopt every article of faith, which seemed to offer any resemblance, however distant or imperfect, with the popular mythology; and the legends of Bacchus, of Hercules, and of Æsculapius, had, in some measure, prepared their imagination for the appearance of the Son of God under a human form. 12 But they were astonished that the Christians should abandon the temples of those ancient heroes, who, in the infancy of the world, had invented arts, instituted laws, and vanquished the tyrants or monsters who infested the earth, in order to choose for the exclusive object of their religious worship an obscure teacher, who, in a recent age, and among a barbarous people, had fallen a sacrifice either to the malice of his own countrymen, or to the jealousy of the Roman government. The Pagan multitude, reserving their gratitude for temporal benefits alone, rejected the inestimable present of life and immortality, which was offered to mankind by Jesus of Nazareth. His mild constancy in the midst of cruel and voluntary sufferings, his universal benevolence, and the sublime simplicity of his actions and character, were insufficient, in the opinion of those carnal men, to compensate for the want of fame, of empire, and of success; and whilst they refused to acknowledge his stupendous triumph over the powers of darkness and of the grave, they misrepresented, or they insulted, the equivocal birth, wandering life, and ignominious death, of the divine Author of Christianity. 13
基督教的创始者不仅被门徒尊为圣哲与先知,更被奉为神明——这或许还不算太令人惊讶。多神教徒本就乐于接纳一切与流行神话稍有相似(无论相似得多么疏远或不全)的信条;而巴克斯、赫拉克勒斯与埃斯库拉庇乌斯的种种传说,在某种程度上早已使他们的想象为上帝之子以人形降世作好了准备。12 然而令他们诧异的是:那些古代英雄在世界之初发明技艺、创立法律、剿灭祸害大地的暴君或怪物,基督徒竟弃其神庙于不顾,偏偏挑中一位默默无闻的教师,把他奉为唯一的崇拜对象——此人不过晚近之世出于一个野蛮民族,最终或死于本国同胞的恶意,或死于罗马政府的猜忌。异教群氓只肯把感激留给现世的好处,对拿撒勒的耶稣所赐予人类那生命与永生的无价之礼,一概拒之门外。在这些只重肉身之人看来,他在残酷而甘愿承受的苦难中那份温和的坚贞、他博爱众生的胸怀、他言行与品格中那崇高的质朴,都不足以弥补他在名望、权势与功业上的欠缺;他们既不肯承认他战胜黑暗与坟墓势力那惊天动地的凯旋,反倒对这位神圣的基督教创立者含糊的出身、漂泊的生涯与屈辱的死亡,或加以歪曲,或横施羞辱。13
The personal guilt which every Christian had contracted, in thus preferring his private sentiment to the national religion, was aggravated in a very high degree by the number and union of the criminals. It is well known, and has been already observed, that Roman policy viewed with the utmost jealousy and distrust any association among its subjects; and that the privileges of private corporations, though formed for the most harmless or beneficial purposes, were bestowed with a very sparing hand. 14 The religious assemblies of the Christians who had separated themselves from the public worship, appeared of a much less innocent nature; they were illegal in their principle, and in their consequences might become dangerous; nor were the emperors conscious that they violated the laws of justice, when, for the peace of society, they prohibited those secret and sometimes nocturnal meetings. 15 The pious disobedience of the Christians made their conduct, or perhaps their designs, appear in a much more serious and criminal light; and the Roman princes, who might perhaps have suffered themselves to be disarmed by a ready submission, deeming their honor concerned in the execution of their commands, sometimes attempted, by rigorous punishments, to subdue this independent spirit, which boldly acknowledged an authority superior to that of the magistrate. The extent and duration of this spiritual conspiracy seemed to render it everyday more deserving of his animadversion. We have already seen that the active and successful zeal of the Christians had insensibly diffused them through every province and almost every city of the empire. The new converts seemed to renounce their family and country, that they might connect themselves in an indissoluble band of union with a peculiar society, which every where assumed a different character from the rest of mankind. Their gloomy and austere aspect, their abhorrence of the common business and pleasures of life, and their frequent predictions of impending calamities, 16 inspired the Pagans with the apprehension of some danger, which would arise from the new sect, the more alarming as it was the more obscure. “Whatever,” says Pliny, “may be the principle of their conduct, their inflexible obstinacy appeared deserving of punishment.” 17
每个基督徒以一己之见凌驾于民族宗教之上,本就各负其罪,而罪人数目之众、彼此结合之紧,更使这罪愆平添了几分严重。众所周知(前文亦已提及),罗马的政策对臣民间的任何结社都抱着极度的猜忌与不信任;即便是为最无害或最有益的宗旨而设的私人团体,其特权也是极吝啬地才肯授予。14 基督徒既自绝于公共礼拜之外,他们的宗教集会便显得远不那么单纯:这类集会原则上即属非法,其后果也可能酿成祸患;因此诸帝为了社会安宁而禁止这种秘密的、有时甚至在夜间举行的聚会,并不觉得自己有违公道之法。15 基督徒这种出于虔敬的抗命,使他们的行为——或许还有他们的图谋——显得罪加一等;罗马诸帝本或会因对方爽快的顺服而放下戒备,此刻却认为自己的尊严系于命令能否贯彻,便时而以严刑峻法,力图压服这股桀骜不驯的精神——它竟公然承认有一种权威凌驾于官府之上。这场精神密谋涉及之广、延续之久,似乎使它一天比一天更该受到官府的惩治。前文已经看到,基督徒那积极而卓有成效的热忱,早已不知不觉把他们散布到每一个行省、几乎每一座城市。这些新皈依者仿佛抛弃了家庭与祖国,只为把自己与一个奇特的团体结成牢不可破的联盟,而这团体所到之处,都摆出一副与其余人类迥然不同的面目。他们那阴郁而严峻的神色、对世俗营生与享乐的厌弃,以及频频预言大祸将至,16 都使异教徒惶惶不安,唯恐这新教派会招来某种危险——越是晦暗不明,就越发令人心惊。普林尼说:“无论他们的行事出于什么原则,单凭那顽固不化、死不悔改的执拗,就已该受惩罚。”17
The precautions with which the disciples of Christ performed the offices of religion were at first dictated by fear and necessity; but they were continued from choice. By imitating the awful secrecy which reigned in the Eleusinian mysteries, the Christians had flattered themselves that they should render their sacred institutions more respectable in the eyes of the Pagan world. 18 But the event, as it often happens to the operations of subtile policy, deceived their wishes and their expectations. It was concluded, that they only concealed what they would have blushed to disclose. Their mistaken prudence afforded an opportunity for malice to invent, and for suspicious credulity to believe, the horrid tales which described the Christians as the most wicked of human kind, who practised in their dark recesses every abomination that a depraved fancy could suggest, and who solicited the favor of their unknown God by the sacrifice of every moral virtue. There were many who pretended to confess or to relate the ceremonies of this abhorred society. It was asserted, “that a new-born infant, entirely covered over with flour, was presented, like some mystic symbol of initiation, to the knife of the proselyte, who unknowingly inflicted many a secret and mortal wound on the innocent victim of his error; that as soon as the cruel deed was perpetrated, the sectaries drank up the blood, greedily tore asunder the quivering members, and pledged themselves to eternal secrecy, by a mutual consciousness of guilt. It was as confidently affirmed, that this inhuman sacrifice was succeeded by a suitable entertainment, in which intemperance served as a provocative to brutal lust; till, at the appointed moment, the lights were suddenly extinguished, shame was banished, nature was forgotten; and, as accident might direct, the darkness of the night was polluted by the incestuous commerce of sisters and brothers, of sons and of mothers.” 19
基督的门徒行宗教仪式时那般小心翼翼,起初原是出于恐惧与不得已,后来却出于自愿而沿袭下来。他们仿效厄琉西斯秘仪中那种令人肃然的隐秘,暗自庆幸这样能使自家的圣事在异教世界眼中更显庄严可敬。18 岂料事与愿违——正如老谋深算的种种做法常有的结局,这一层遮掩辜负了他们的心愿与指望。人们断定:他们所隐瞒的,无非是些一旦公开便会脸红之事。他们这份用错了地方的审慎,恰好给了恶意以编造的机会、给了多疑轻信之人以采信的口实,于是种种骇人听闻的传闻应运而生,把基督徒描绘成人类中最邪恶之徒:说他们在暗室幽处,凡堕落心思所能想到的丑行无所不为,还靠着牺牲一切道德操守来博取那不为人知之神的欢心。有不少人自称曾亲历、或能细述这可憎团体的仪式。据称:“一个新生的婴儿,浑身裹满面粉,如同某种入教的神秘象征,被送到新入教者的刀下;此人懵然不知,竟在这蒙昧的无辜牺牲品身上暗暗刺下一道道致命之伤;狠毒的勾当一经得手,教众便吸干鲜血,贪婪地撕裂那尚在颤动的肢体,并以彼此同罪的心照不宣,立誓永守此秘。有人同样言之凿凿地断言:这惨绝人寰的祭献之后,还有一场与之相配的宴饮,其间纵酒无度,成了兽欲的催情之媒;直到约定的时刻,灯火骤然熄灭,廉耻被逐、天性尽忘;于是任凭偶然摆布,黑夜的幽暗被姊妹与兄弟、儿子与母亲之间的乱伦苟合所玷污。”19
But the perusal of the ancient apologies was sufficient to remove even the slightest suspicion from the mind of a candid adversary. The Christians, with the intrepid security of innocence, appeal from the voice of rumor to the equity of the magistrates. They acknowledge, that if any proof can be produced of the crimes which calumny has imputed to them, they are worthy of the most severe punishment. They provoke the punishment, and they challenge the proof. At the same time they urge, with equal truth and propriety, that the charge is not less devoid of probability, than it is destitute of evidence; they ask, whether any one can seriously believe that the pure and holy precepts of the gospel, which so frequently restrain the use of the most lawful enjoyments, should inculcate the practice of the most abominable crimes; that a large society should resolve to dishonor itself in the eyes of its own members; and that a great number of persons of either sex, and every age and character, insensible to the fear of death or infamy, should consent to violate those principles which nature and education had imprinted most deeply in their minds. 20 Nothing, it should seem, could weaken the force or destroy the effect of so unanswerable a justification, unless it were the injudicious conduct of the apologists themselves, who betrayed the common cause of religion, to gratify their devout hatred to the domestic enemies of the church. It was sometimes faintly insinuated, and sometimes boldly asserted, that the same bloody sacrifices, and the same incestuous festivals, which were so falsely ascribed to the orthodox believers, were in reality celebrated by the Marcionites, by the Carpocratians, and by several other sects of the Gnostics, who, notwithstanding they might deviate into the paths of heresy, were still actuated by the sentiments of men, and still governed by the precepts of Christianity. 21 Accusations of a similar kind were retorted upon the church by the schismatics who had departed from its communion, 22 and it was confessed on all sides, that the most scandalous licentiousness of manners prevailed among great numbers of those who affected the name of Christians. A Pagan magistrate, who possessed neither leisure nor abilities to discern the almost imperceptible line which divides the orthodox faith from heretical pravity, might easily have imagined that their mutual animosity had extorted the discovery of their common guilt. It was fortunate for the repose, or at least for the reputation, of the first Christians, that the magistrates sometimes proceeded with more temper and moderation than is usually consistent with religious zeal, and that they reported, as the impartial result of their judicial inquiry, that the sectaries, who had deserted the established worship, appeared to them sincere in their professions, and blameless in their manners; however they might incur, by their absurd and excessive superstition, the censure of the laws. 23
然而,只要读一读古代的护教诸篇,便足以从任何公正对手的心中涤去哪怕最轻微的疑窦。基督徒以无辜者那份无所畏惧的坦然,从流言蜚语转而诉诸官府的公道。他们承认:倘若诽谤强加于他们的种种罪行果真拿得出任何证据,他们便理当受最严厉的惩罚。他们既招引刑罚,又索要证据。同时他们以同样在理而得体的言辞力陈:这项指控既毫无证据,也同样毫无可能。他们反问:难道有谁会当真相信,福音那纯洁圣善、连最合法的享乐都屡加节制的训诫,反倒会教人去干最可憎的罪行?难道会有一个庞大的社会,甘愿在自己成员眼中自取其辱?难道会有一大批男女老幼、形形色色之人,全不惧死亡与恶名,竟一致同意去践踏那些天性与教养深深烙印在他们心底的原则?20 看来,没有什么能削弱这番无可辩驳的申辩之力、抹杀其效验,除非是护教者自己那不明智的言行:他们为泄一己虔诚的憎恨,去攻讦教会内部的敌人,反倒出卖了宗教的共同事业。人们时而隐隐暗示、时而公然断言:那些被如此不实地栽赃给正统信徒的血腥祭献与乱伦宴饮,其实是马西昂派、卡尔波克拉特派以及诺斯替派其他几个支派所行——这些人纵然误入异端歧途,却仍受人之常情的驱使,仍受基督教训诫的约束。21 脱离教会、另立门户的分裂派也以同类指控反唇相讥,22 而各方都承认:在众多冒用基督徒之名的人中间,确有最伤风败俗的放荡之行盛行。一个异教官员,既无闲暇又无本事去分辨正统信仰与异端邪说之间那几乎难以察觉的界线,便很容易以为:他们彼此的仇视,恰恰逼出了对其共同罪行的招认。所幸对初代基督徒的安宁——至少是名声——而言,官员们有时办事竟比宗教狂热通常所容许的更为持重、更为克制,他们在司法查究之后,以不偏不倚的裁断报称:这些背弃了既定礼拜的教派信徒,在他们看来所言真诚、行止无可指摘,尽管这些人或许会因其荒谬而过分的迷信而招致法律的申斥。23
Notes 注释
1111
The sixteenth chapter I cannot help considering as a very ingenious and specious, but very disgraceful extenuation of the cruelties perpetrated by the Roman magistrates against the Christians. It is written in the most contemptibly factious spirit of prejudice against the sufferers; it is unworthy of a philosopher and of humanity. Let the narrative of Cyprian’s death be examined. He had to relate the murder of an innocent man of advanced age, and in a station deemed venerable by a considerable body of the provincials of Africa, put to death because he refused to sacrifice to Jupiter. Instead of pointing the indignation of posterity against such an atrocious act of tyranny, he dwells, with visible art, on the small circumstances of decorum and politeness which attended this murder, and which he relates with as much parade as if they were the most important particulars of the event. Dr. Robertson has been the subject of much blame for his real or supposed lenity towards the Spanish murderers and tyrants in America. That the sixteenth chapter of Mr. G. did not excite the same or greater disapprobation, is a proof of the unphilosophical and indeed fanatical animosity against Christianity, which was so prevalent during the latter part of the eighteenth century.—Mackintosh: see Life, i. p. 244, 245.
第十六章,我不能不视之为对罗马官员迫害基督徒之种种暴行所作的一篇极其巧妙、貌似有理、却极为可耻的开脱。它写得满含对受难者最卑劣的党同伐异之偏见,有辱哲人身份,也有悖于人道。且看他对西普里安之死的叙述:他要讲述的,是一位无辜老人的被杀——此人年事已高,所居的职位又为阿非利加行省相当一部分居民所敬重,只因拒绝向朱庇特献祭便被处死。他非但不去激起后世对这一暴虐罪行的义愤,反而处心积虑地在这桩谋杀所伴随的那些礼数周全、彬彬有礼的细枝末节上大做文章,叙来铺张扬厉,仿佛这些才是整件事最要紧的原委。罗伯逊博士曾因对美洲的西班牙杀人者与暴君真有或据说有的宽纵,而备受责难。吉本先生的第十六章竟未招致同样甚或更甚的非议,这恰恰证明了十八世纪后半叶何等盛行那种缺乏哲人风度、实则近乎狂热的反基督教敌意。——麦金托什:见其《生平》(Life),第一卷,第244、245页。
1222
The history of the first age of Christianity is only found in the Acts of the Apostles, and in order to speak of the first persecutions experienced by the Christians, that book should naturally have been consulted; those persecutions, then limited to individuals and to a narrow sphere, interested only the persecuted, and have been related by them alone. Gibbon making the persecutions ascend no higher than Nero, has entirely omitted those which preceded this epoch, and of which St. Luke has preserved the memory. The only way to justify this omission was, to attack the authenticity of the Acts of the Apostles; for, if authentic, they must necessarily be consulted and quoted. Now, antiquity has left very few works of which the authenticity is so well established as that of the Acts of the Apostles. (See Lardner’s Cred. of Gospel Hist. part iii.) It is therefore, without sufficient reason, that Gibbon has maintained silence concerning the narrative of St. Luke, and this omission is not without importance.—G.
基督教最初一世纪的历史,唯见于《使徒行传》;要谈基督徒所遭受的最早几次迫害,本应自然而然地查阅此书。那些迫害当时只及于个别人、局限于狭小范围,只与受迫害者切身相关,也唯有他们记述过。吉本把迫害的起点上溯不过尼禄,遂将此前发生、并由圣路加保存了记忆的诸次迫害完全略去。要为这一略去开脱,唯一的办法便是攻击《使徒行传》的真实性;因为它若属真,就必然要被查阅征引。而古代传世的著作中,真实性能像《使徒行传》这般确凿无疑的,实在寥寥无几。(见拉德纳《福音史可信性》第三部分,Lardner's Cred. of Gospel Hist. part iii.)因此,吉本对圣路加的记述缄口不言,并无充分理由,而这一略去也并非无关紧要。——G。
1
In Cyrene, they massacred 220,000 Greeks; in Cyprus, 240,000; in Egypt, a very great multitude. Many of these unhappy victims were sawn asunder, according to a precedent to which David had given the sanction of his example. The victorious Jews devoured the flesh, licked up the blood, and twisted the entrails like a girdle round their bodies. See Dion Cassius, l. lxviii. p. 1145. * Note: Some commentators, among them Reimar, in his notes on Dion Cassius think that the hatred of the Romans against the Jews has led the historian to exaggerate the cruelties committed by the latter. Don. Cass. lxviii. p. 1146.—G.
在昔兰尼,他们屠杀了二十二万希腊人;在塞浦路斯,二十四万;在埃及,则是极大一群。这许多不幸的牺牲者,有不少被锯成两段——此举乃援大卫亲身立下的先例为据。得胜的犹太人吞食其肉、舔尽其血,还把肠子像腰带一样缠在身上。见 Dion Cassius, l. lxviii. p. 1145。* 注:有些注家,其中包括赖马尔,在其为狄奥·卡西乌斯所作的注释中认为,罗马人对犹太人的仇恨,导致史家夸大了后者所犯的暴行。Don. Cass. lxviii. p. 1146。——G。
2
Without repeating the well-known narratives of Josephus, we may learn from Dion, (l. lxix. p. 1162,) that in Hadrian’s war 580,000 Jews were cut off by the sword, besides an infinite number which perished by famine, by disease, and by fire.
约瑟夫斯那些尽人皆知的记述无须重复,我们从狄奥(l. lxix. p. 1162)即可获知:在哈德良之役中,被刀剑所杀的犹太人达五十八万,此外死于饥荒、疫病与烈火者更不计其数。
3
For the sect of the Zealots, see Basnage, Histoire des Juifs, l. i. c. 17; for the characters of the Messiah, according to the Rabbis, l. v. c. 11, 12, 13; for the actions of Barchochebas, l. vii. c. 12. (Hist. of Jews iii. 115, &c.)—M.
关于奋锐党这一教派,见巴纳日《犹太人史》(Histoire des Juifs, l. i. c. 17);关于拉比笔下弥赛亚的种种特征,见 l. v. c. 11, 12, 13;关于巴尔·科赫巴的事迹,见 l. vii. c. 12。(Hist. of Jews iii. 115, &c.)——M。
4
It is to Modestinus, a Roman lawyer (l. vi. regular.) that we are indebted for a distinct knowledge of the Edict of Antoninus. See Casaubon ad Hist. August. p. 27.
我们之所以能对安敦尼敕令有明确的了解,全赖罗马法学家莫德斯提努斯(l. vi. regular.)。参见 Casaubon ad Hist. August. p. 27。
5
See Basnage, Histoire des Juifs, l. iii. c. 2, 3. The office of Patriarch was suppressed by Theodosius the younger.
见巴纳日《犹太人史》(Histoire des Juifs, l. iii. c. 2, 3)。族长一职后由小狄奥多西废除。
6
We need only mention the Purim, or deliverance of the Jews from he rage of Haman, which, till the reign of Theodosius, was celebrated with insolent triumph and riotous intemperance. Basnage, Hist. des Juifs, l. vi. c. 17, l. viii. c. 6.
只须提一提普珥节,即犹太人得脱哈曼暴怒之难的纪念日;直到狄奥多西一朝,此节仍以放肆的欢庆与狂饮无度来举行。见 Basnage, Hist. des Juifs, l. vi. c. 17, l. viii. c. 6。
7
According to the false Josephus, Tsepho, the grandson of Esau, conducted into Italy the army of Eneas, king of Carthage. Another colony of Idumæans, flying from the sword of David, took refuge in the dominions of Romulus. For these, or for other reasons of equal weight, the name of Edom was applied by the Jews to the Roman empire. * Note: The false Josephus is a romancer of very modern date, though some of these legends are probably more ancient. It may be worth considering whether many of the stories in the Talmud are not history in a figurative disguise, adopted from prudence. The Jews might dare to say many things of Rome, under the significant appellation of Edom, which they feared to utter publicly. Later and more ignorant ages took literally, and perhaps embellished, what was intelligible among the generation to which it was addressed. Hist. of Jews, iii. 131. ——The false Josephus has the inauguration of the emperor, with the seven electors and apparently the pope assisting at the coronation! Pref. page xxvi.—M.
据伪约瑟夫斯所言,以扫之孙洗玻曾把迦太基王埃涅阿斯的军队引入意大利。另有一支以土买人,为躲避大卫的刀剑而逃入罗慕路斯的疆域避难。基于这些、或其他同样分量的缘由,犹太人便把“以东”之名加在罗马帝国身上。* 注:伪约瑟夫斯是一位年代甚晚的传奇作者,尽管其中有些传说很可能更为古老。这里颇值得思量:《塔木德》中许多故事,会不会正是出于审慎而披上比喻外衣的历史?犹太人在“以东”这个别有深意的称号下,或许敢于道出许多有关罗马、却不敢公开宣之于口的话。后世更为无知的时代,把本可为当时受众所领会的言辞照字面理解,甚或加以铺陈。Hist. of Jews, iii. 131。——伪约瑟夫斯书中竟有皇帝的即位礼,还有七大选帝侯、乃至似乎连教宗也在场为其加冕!Pref. page xxvi。——M。
8
From the arguments of Celsus, as they are represented and refuted by Origen, (l. v. p. 247—259,) we may clearly discover the distinction that was made between the Jewish people and the Christian sect. See, in the Dialogue of Minucius Felix, (c. 5, 6,) a fair and not inelegant description of the popular sentiments, with regard to the desertion of the established worship.
从塞尔苏斯的论辩——经奥利金转述并加以驳斥(l. v. p. 247—259)——我们可以清楚看出:当时人们把犹太民族与基督教派区分对待。至于世人对背弃既定礼拜一事的普遍看法,可参见米努基乌斯·菲利克斯《对话录》(c. 5, 6) 中一段公允而不失文采的描述。
8111
In all this there is doubtless much truth; yet does not the more important difference lie on the surface? The Christians made many converts the Jews but few. Had the Jewish been equally a proselyting religion would it not have encountered as violent persecution?—M.
这一切固然大都属实;然而那更要紧的区别,岂不就摆在明面上吗?基督徒招得众多皈依者,犹太人却寥寥无几。倘若犹太教同样是一种四处招徕信众的宗教,它岂不也会遭遇同样激烈的迫害?——M。
9
Cur nullas aras habent? templa nulla? nulla nota simulacra!—Unde autem, vel quis ille, aut ubi, Deus unicus, solitarius, desti tutus? Minucius Felix, c. 10. The Pagan interlocutor goes on to make a distinction in favor of the Jews, who had once a temple, altars, victims, &c.
Cur nullas aras habent? templa nulla? nulla nota simulacra!—Unde autem, vel quis ille, aut ubi, Deus unicus, solitarius, destitutus?(意谓:他们为何没有祭坛?没有神庙?没有众所周知的神像?这独一、孤零、无依无靠的神,究竟从何而来、是谁、又在何处?)Minucius Felix, c. 10。那位异教对话者接着又为犹太人开脱,称他们从前尚有圣殿、祭坛、牺牲等等。
10
It is difficult (says Plato) to attain, and dangerous to publish, the knowledge of the true God. See the Theologie des Philosophes, in the Abbé d’Olivet’s French translation of Tully de Naturâ Deorum, tom. i. p. 275.
柏拉图说,认识真神既难,宣讲又危险。见《哲学家的神学》(Theologie des Philosophes),载奥利韦神父所译西塞罗《论神性》(Tully de Naturâ Deorum) 法译本,第一卷,第275页。
11
The author of the Philopatris perpetually treats the Christians as a company of dreaming enthusiasts, &c.; and in one place he manifestly alludes to the vision in which St. Paul was transported to the third heaven. In another place, Triephon, who personates a Christian, after deriding the gods of Paganism, proposes a mysterious oath.
《爱国者》的作者始终把基督徒当作一群做梦的狂热之徒来对待,等等;有一处他显然是在影射圣保罗被提到第三层天的那次异象。另一处,扮作基督徒的特里丰在嘲弄了异教诸神之后,提出了一句神秘的誓言。
12
According to Justin Martyr, (Apolog. Major, c. 70-85,) the dæmon who had gained some imperfect knowledge of the prophecies, purposely contrived this resemblance, which might deter, though by different means, both the people and the philosophers from embracing the faith of Christ.
据殉道者查士丁(Apolog. Major, c. 70-85)所言,那魔鬼因对先知预言略知一二,便刻意炮制出这种相似,好用不同的手段,使民众与哲人都不敢皈依基督的信仰。
13
In the first and second books of Origen, Celsus treats the birth and character of our Savior with the most impious contempt. The orator Libanius praises Porphyry and Julian for confuting the folly of a sect., which styles a dead man of Palestine, God, and the Son of God. Socrates, Hist. Ecclesiast. iii. 23.
在奥利金一书的第一、二卷中,塞尔苏斯以最不敬的轻蔑口吻谈论我们救主的出身与品格。演说家利巴尼乌斯称赞波菲利与尤利安驳倒了一个教派的荒唐——这教派竟把一个已死的巴勒斯坦人尊为神、尊为上帝之子。Socrates, Hist. Ecclesiast. iii. 23。
14
The emperor Trajan refused to incorporate a company of 150 firemen, for the use of the city of Nicomedia. He disliked all associations. See Plin. Epist. x. 42, 43.
皇帝图拉真拒绝批准为尼科米底亚城组建一支一百五十人的消防队。他厌恶一切结社。见 Plin. Epist. x. 42, 43。
15
The proconsul Pliny had published a general edict against unlawful meetings. The prudence of the Christians suspended their Agapæ; but it was impossible for them to omit the exercise of public worship.
总督普林尼曾颁布一道禁止非法集会的通令。基督徒出于审慎,暂停了他们的爱宴;但要他们放弃公开的礼拜,却是万万不能。
16
As the prophecies of the Antichrist, approaching conflagration, &c., provoked those Pagans whom they did not convert, they were mentioned with caution and reserve; and the Montanists were censured for disclosing too freely the dangerous secret. See Mosheim, 413.
由于关于敌基督、大火将至等等的预言,虽未使那些异教徒皈依,却激怒了他们,故而这类预言被谨慎而有所保留地提及;孟他努派也因过于轻率地泄露了这一危险的秘密而受到责难。见 Mosheim, 413。
17
Neque enim dubitabam, quodcunque esset quod faterentur, (such are the words of Pliny,) pervicacian certe et inflexibilem obstinationem lebere puniri.
Neque enim dubitabam, quodcunque esset quod faterentur, (这是普林尼的原话)pervicaciam certe et inflexibilem obstinationem debere puniri。(意谓:因为我毫不怀疑,无论他们所供认的是什么,单凭那份顽固与不可动摇的执拗,也确实该受惩罚。)
18
See Mosheim’s Ecclesiastical History, vol. i. p. 101, and Spanheim, Remarques sur les Cæsars de Julien, p. 468, &c.
见莫斯海姆《教会史》(Ecclesiastical History),第一卷,第101页;又见斯潘海姆《尤利安〈诸恺撒〉评注》(Remarques sur les Cæsars de Julien),第468页及以下诸页。
19
See Justin Martyr, Apolog. i. 35, ii. 14. Athenagoras, in Legation, c. 27. Tertullian, Apolog. c. 7, 8, 9. Minucius Felix, c. 9, 10, 80, 31. The last of these writers relates the accusation in the most elegant and circumstantial manner. The answer of Tertullian is the boldest and most vigorous.
见 Justin Martyr, Apolog. i. 35, ii. 14;Athenagoras, in Legation, c. 27;Tertullian, Apolog. c. 7, 8, 9;Minucius Felix, c. 9, 10, 80, 31。这几位作者中的最后一位(米努基乌斯·菲利克斯),把这一指控叙述得最为优雅而详尽;德尔图良的回应则最为大胆有力。
20
In the persecution of Lyons, some Gentile slaves were compelled, by the fear of tortures, to accuse their Christian master. The church of Lyons, writing to their brethren of Asia, treat the horrid charge with proper indignation and contempt. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. v. i.
在里昂的迫害中,一些异教奴隶因惧怕酷刑,被迫指控其基督徒主人。里昂教会致书亚细亚(行省)的弟兄,以恰如其分的义愤与轻蔑对待这一骇人的指控。Euseb. Hist. Eccles. v. i。
21
See Justin Martyr, Apolog. i. 35. Irenæus adv. Hæres. i. 24. Clemens. Alexandrin. Stromat. l. iii. p. 438. Euseb. iv. 8. It would be tedious and disgusting to relate all that the succeeding writers have imagined, all that Epiphanius has received, and all that Tillemont has copied. M. de Beausobre (Hist. du Manicheisme, l. ix. c. 8, 9) has exposed, with great spirit, the disingenuous arts of Augustin and Pope Leo I.
见 Justin Martyr, Apolog. i. 35;Irenæus adv. Hæres. i. 24;Clemens. Alexandrin. Stromat. l. iii. p. 438;Euseb. iv. 8。后世作者所臆想的一切、埃皮法尼乌斯所采信的一切、蒂耶蒙所转抄的一切,若要一一复述,未免既冗长又令人生厌。博索布尔先生(Hist. du Manicheisme, l. ix. c. 8, 9)以极大的锐气,揭穿了奥古斯丁与教宗利奥一世那些不诚实的伎俩。
22
When Tertullian became a Montanist, he aspersed the morals of the church which he had so resolutely defended. “Sed majoris est Agape, quia per hanc adolescentes tui cum sororibus dormiunt, appendices scilicet gulæ lascivia et luxuria.” De Jejuniis c. 17. The 85th canon of the council of Illiberis provides against the scandals which too often polluted the vigils of the church, and disgraced the Christian name in the eyes of unbelievers.
德尔图良皈依孟他努派后,转而诋毁他先前曾坚决为之辩护的教会的品行:“Sed majoris est Agape, quia per hanc adolescentes tui cum sororibus dormiunt, appendices scilicet gulæ lascivia et luxuria.” De Jejuniis c. 17。伊利贝里斯会议第八十五条教规,正是为防范那些屡屡玷污教会守夜礼、并使基督徒之名在异教徒眼中蒙羞的丑行而设。
23
Tertullian (Apolog. c. 2) expatiates on the fair and honorable testimony of Pliny, with much reason and some declamation.
德尔图良(Apolog. c. 2)就普林尼那公正而体面的证词大加发挥,其中不乏道理,也颇有几分夸饰之辞。