Chapter XXI: Persecution Of Heresy, State Of The Church.—Part I. 第二十一章对异端的迫害；教会的状况——第一节

Chapter XXI: Persecution Of Heresy, State Of The Church.—Part I.

第二十一章对异端的迫害；教会的状况——第一节

Persecution Of Heresy.—The Schism Of The Donatists.—The Arian Controversy.—Athanasius.—Distracted State Of The Church And Empire Under Constantine And His Sons.— Toleration Of Paganism. The grateful applause of the clergy has consecrated the memory of a prince who indulged their passions and promoted their interest. Constantine gave them security, wealth, honors, and revenge; and the support of the orthodox faith was considered as the most sacred and important duty of the civil magistrate. The edict of Milan, the great charter of toleration, had confirmed to each individual of the Roman world the privilege of choosing and professing his own religion. But this inestimable privilege was soon violated; with the knowledge of truth, the emperor imbibed the maxims of persecution; and the sects which dissented from the Catholic church were afflicted and oppressed by the triumph of Christianity. Constantine easily believed that the Heretics, who presumed to dispute his opinions, or to oppose his commands, were guilty of the most absurd and criminal obstinacy; and that a seasonable application of moderate severities might save those unhappy men from the danger of an everlasting condemnation. Not a moment was lost in excluding the ministers and teachers of the separated congregations from any share of the rewards and immunities which the emperor had so liberally bestowed on the orthodox clergy. But as the sectaries might still exist under the cloud of royal disgrace, the conquest of the East was immediately followed by an edict which announced their total destruction. ¹ After a preamble filled with passion and reproach, Constantine absolutely prohibits the assemblies of the Heretics, and confiscates their public property to the use either of the revenue or of the Catholic church. The sects against whom the Imperial severity was directed, appear to have been the adherents of Paul of Samosata; the Montanists of Phrygia, who maintained an enthusiastic succession of prophecy; the Novatians, who sternly rejected the temporal efficacy of repentance; the Marcionites and Valentinians, under whose leading banners the various Gnostics of Asia and Egypt had insensibly rallied; and perhaps the Manichæans, who had recently imported from Persia a more artful composition of Oriental and Christian theology. ² The design of extirpating the name, or at least of restraining the progress, of these odious Heretics, was prosecuted with vigor and effect. Some of the penal regulations were copied from the edicts of Diocletian; and this method of conversion was applauded by the same bishops who had felt the hand of oppression, and pleaded for the rights of humanity. Two immaterial circumstances may serve, however, to prove that the mind of Constantine was not entirely corrupted by the spirit of zeal and bigotry. Before he condemned the Manichæans and their kindred sects, he resolved to make an accurate inquiry into the nature of their religious principles. As if he distrusted the impartiality of his ecclesiastical counsellors, this delicate commission was intrusted to a civil magistrate, whose learning and moderation he justly esteemed, and of whose venal character he was probably ignorant. ³ The emperor was soon convinced, that he had too hastily proscribed the orthodox faith and the exemplary morals of the Novatians, who had dissented from the church in some articles of discipline which were not perhaps essential to salvation. By a particular edict, he exempted them from the general penalties of the law; ⁴ allowed them to build a church at Constantinople, respected the miracles of their saints, invited their bishop Acesius to the council of Nice; and gently ridiculed the narrow tenets of his sect by a familiar jest; which, from the mouth of a sovereign, must have been received with applause and gratitude. ⁵

对异端的迫害。多纳图斯派的分裂。阿里乌派之争。阿塔纳修斯。君士坦丁及其诸子治下教会与帝国的动荡。对异教的宽容。教士们感激的颂扬，使一位君主的英名永受尊崇——只因他纵容了他们的意气，又成全了他们的私利。君士坦丁赐予他们安全、财富、荣耀，还有复仇的快意；而扶持正统信仰，遂被奉为世俗官长最神圣、最重大的职责。《米兰敕令》乃宽容之大宪章，本已确认罗马世界人人皆有择教、奉教之权。然而这无价之权，转眼便遭践踏；皇帝既领受了真理之知，也一并汲取了迫害之道；凡背离大公教会的各派，都因基督教的凯旋而备受折磨与压迫。凡异端胆敢质疑“他本人”的见解、违抗“他本人”的号令，君士坦丁便一口咬定，这是荒谬绝伦、罪不容赦的顽固；而适时施以几分适度的惩戒，或许正可使这些不幸之人免于永劫沉沦之险。于是刻不容缓：皇帝慷慨赐予正统教士的种种赏赐与豁免，一概不许分裂教派的教牧与师尊染指分毫。但这些异派纵蒙圣怒、身处阴翳，毕竟尚可苟存；因此东方一经征服，随即颁下敕令，宣告要将他们斩草除根。¹ 敕文序言充满激愤与斥责，继而斩钉截铁地严禁异端聚会，并没收其公产，或充国库，或归大公教会。皇帝的严威所指，似乎正是这几派：萨莫萨塔的保罗之门徒；弗里吉亚的孟他努派，他们自诩承续着一脉狂热的预言；诺洼天派，他们断然否认忏悔在今生的效力；马西昂派与瓦伦廷派，亚细亚与埃及形形色色的诺斯替信徒不知不觉都聚于其麾下；或许还有摩尼教徒，他们新近从波斯输入了一套东方神学与基督教神学更为巧妙的杂糅。² 他决意要将这些可憎的异端连名号一并铲除，至少也要遏其蔓延，而且雷厉风行，颇见成效。其中若干刑律，径直抄自戴克里先的敕令；而对这种“劝人皈依”之法拍手称快的，恰是当年亲尝压迫之苦、曾为人类权利大声疾呼的那班主教。不过，有两桩无关宏旨的小事，或可证明君士坦丁的心智尚未被狂热与偏执之气全然侵蚀。在定摩尼教徒及其同类各派之罪以前，他决意先对其教义之底细详加查究。他仿佛信不过教界谋士的公允，遂将这桩微妙差事托付给一位世俗官长——此人的学识与稳健为他所推重，实至名归，而其贪墨的品性，他大概并不知情。³ 皇帝很快便信服：自己操之过急，竟连诺洼天派也一并明令查禁，而这一派信仰纯正、德行堪为楷模，只在若干戒规上与教会立异，那些戒规于救赎或许无关紧要。于是他特颁一令，免除他们依律本应受的种种刑罚，⁴ 准许他们在君士坦丁堡建造教堂，敬重其圣徒所行的神迹，还邀请他们的主教阿凯西乌斯出席尼西亚会议；席间又以一句家常玩笑，温言取笑该派的狭隘教条——这话出自一国之君之口，想必是博得了一片喝彩与感激。⁵

The complaints and mutual accusations which assailed the throne of Constantine, as soon as the death of Maxentius had submitted Africa to his victorious arms, were ill adapted to edify an imperfect proselyte. He learned, with surprise, that the provinces of that great country, from the confines of Cyrene to the columns of Hercules, were distracted with religious discord. ⁶ The source of the division was derived from a double election in the church of Carthage; the second, in rank and opulence, of the ecclesiastical thrones of the West. Cæcilian and Majorinus were the two rival prelates of Africa; and the death of the latter soon made room for Donatus, who, by his superior abilities and apparent virtues, was the firmest support of his party. The advantage which Cæcilian might claim from the priority of his ordination, was destroyed by the illegal, or at least indecent, haste, with which it had been performed, without expecting the arrival of the bishops of Numidia. The authority of these bishops, who, to the number of seventy, condemned Cæcilian, and consecrated Majorinus, is again weakened by the infamy of some of their personal characters; and by the female intrigues, sacrilegious bargains, and tumultuous proceedings, which are imputed to this Numidian council. ⁷ The bishops of the contending factions maintained, with equal ardor and obstinacy, that their adversaries were degraded, or at least dishonored, by the odious crime of delivering the Holy Scriptures to the officers of Diocletian. From their mutual reproaches, as well as from the story of this dark transaction, it may justly be inferred, that the late persecution had imbittered the zeal, without reforming the manners, of the African Christians. That divided church was incapable of affording an impartial judicature; the controversy was solemnly tried in five successive tribunals, which were appointed by the emperor; and the whole proceeding, from the first appeal to the final sentence, lasted above three years. A severe inquisition, which was taken by the Prætorian vicar, and the proconsul of Africa, the report of two episcopal visitors who had been sent to Carthage, the decrees of the councils of Rome and of Arles, and the supreme judgment of Constantine himself in his sacred consistory, were all favorable to the cause of Cæcilian; and he was unanimously acknowledged by the civil and ecclesiastical powers, as the true and lawful primate of Africa. The honors and estates of the church were attributed to his suffragan bishops, and it was not without difficulty, that Constantine was satisfied with inflicting the punishment of exile on the principal leaders of the Donatist faction. As their cause was examined with attention, perhaps it was determined with justice. Perhaps their complaint was not without foundation, that the credulity of the emperor had been abused by the insidious arts of his favorite Osius. The influence of falsehood and corruption might procure the condemnation of the innocent, or aggravate the sentence of the guilty. Such an act, however, of injustice, if it concluded an importunate dispute, might be numbered among the transient evils of a despotic administration, which are neither felt nor remembered by posterity.

马克森提乌斯一死，阿非利加即臣服于君士坦丁的常胜之师；随之而来的种种控诉与相互攻讦，纷纷涌上他的御座——对一个尚未修成正果的新皈依者，这些争吵实在起不到教化之效。他惊讶地获悉：这一大片疆土上的各行省，自昔兰尼边境直到赫拉克勒斯石柱，无不因宗教纷争而扰攘不宁。⁶ 这场分裂的祸根，在于迦太基教会的一次双重选举——迦太基教座在西方各教座中，论位次与财富都居第二。凯基利安与马约里努斯是阿非利加两位争位的高级教士；后者不久身死，遂为多纳图斯腾出位子——此人才具过人，德行昭彰，实为本派最坚实的支柱。凯基利安受祝圣在先，本可据此占先，可这一优势却毁于祝圣时的仓促——那场典礼办得于法不合，至少也失之体统，竟不等努米底亚的主教们赶到便草草举行。这些主教多达七十人，一齐斥责凯基利安、另立马约里努斯；然而他们的权威又打了折扣，一来其中数人品行不端、声名狼藉，二来这场努米底亚宗教会议还被指沾染了妇人的阴谋、渎神的交易与喧嚣的乱象。⁷ 两派主教各执一词，同样热切，同样固执，都咬定对方犯下了可憎之罪——把《圣经》交予戴克里先的官吏，因而丧失了圣职，至少也名节尽失。从他们彼此的指责，以及这桩晦暗勾当的来龙去脉，尽可公允地推断：新近那场迫害，只是使阿非利加基督徒的热忱更添几分乖戾，却丝毫未能改良他们的品行。教会既已分裂，自难作出公正的裁断；于是这场争端由皇帝钦命的五个法庭相继郑重审理，而整个过程，从最初上诉到终审判决，前后拖了三年有余。禁卫军长官的代理官与阿非利加总督严加查讯，两位主教巡视员奉派赴迦太基后呈上报告，罗马与阿尔勒两次宗教会议先后作出裁决，君士坦丁本人又在其神圣御前会议上作出至高裁断——凡此种种，尽皆有利于凯基利安一方；于是政教两界一致公认，他才是阿非利加真正合法的首席主教。教会的荣衔与产业，都判归“他”属下的各位副主教；至于对多纳图斯派的首要头目，君士坦丁最终仅以流放论处，而要他就此罢手，着实费了一番周折。他们的案情既经悉心审理，其裁断或许也不失公正。不过他们也有一桩怨言，或许并非全无根据：皇帝轻信，竟被其宠臣奥西乌斯的阴险伎俩所蒙蔽。谎言与舞弊一旦得逞，或能使无辜者蒙冤定罪，或使有罪者罪加一等。然而这样一桩不义之举，若能了结一场纠缠不休的争端，也不过是专制统治下转瞬即逝的诸多弊害之一——后世既感觉不到，也不会记挂在心。

But this incident, so inconsiderable that it scarcely deserves a place in history, was productive of a memorable schism which afflicted the provinces of Africa above three hundred years, and was extinguished only with Christianity itself. The inflexible zeal of freedom and fanaticism animated the Donatists to refuse obedience to the usurpers, whose election they disputed, and whose spiritual powers they denied. Excluded from the civil and religious communion of mankind, they boldly excommunicated the rest of mankind, who had embraced the impious party of Cæcilian, and of the Traditors, from which he derived his pretended ordination. They asserted with confidence, and almost with exultation, that the Apostolical succession was interrupted; that all the bishops of Europe and Asia were infected by the contagion of guilt and schism; and that the prerogatives of the Catholic church were confined to the chosen portion of the African believers, who alone had preserved inviolate the integrity of their faith and discipline. This rigid theory was supported by the most uncharitable conduct. Whenever they acquired a proselyte, even from the distant provinces of the East, they carefully repeated the sacred rites of baptism ⁸ and ordination; as they rejected the validity of those which he had already received from the hands of heretics or schismatics. Bishops, virgins, and even spotless infants, were subjected to the disgrace of a public penance, before they could be admitted to the communion of the Donatists. If they obtained possession of a church which had been used by their Catholic adversaries, they purified the unhallowed building with the same zealous care which a temple of idols might have required. They washed the pavement, scraped the walls, burnt the altar, which was commonly of wood, melted the consecrated plate, and cast the Holy Eucharist to the dogs, with every circumstance of ignominy which could provoke and perpetuate the animosity of religious factions. ⁹ Notwithstanding this irreconcilable aversion, the two parties, who were mixed and separated in all the cities of Africa, had the same language and manners, the same zeal and learning, the same faith and worship. Proscribed by the civil and ecclesiastical powers of the empire, the Donatists still maintained in some provinces, particularly in Numidia, their superior numbers; and four hundred bishops acknowledged the jurisdiction of their primate. But the invincible spirit of the sect sometimes preyed on its own vitals: and the bosom of their schismatical church was torn by intestine divisions. A fourth part of the Donatist bishops followed the independent standard of the Maximianists. The narrow and solitary path which their first leaders had marked out, continued to deviate from the great society of mankind. Even the imperceptible sect of the Rogatians could affirm, without a blush, that when Christ should descend to judge the earth, he would find his true religion preserved only in a few nameless villages of the Cæsarean Mauritania. ¹⁰

然而这桩微不足道、几乎不配载入史册的小事，却酿成了一场影响深远的分裂，折磨阿非利加各行省达三百余年，直到基督教本身湮灭，方才随之熄灭。多纳图斯派怀着自由与狂热交织的一腔死硬热忱，拒不服从那些他们眼中的篡位者——他们既不承认那些人的当选，也否认其属灵权柄。他们自己既被逐出人世间的政治与宗教团契之外，却反过来悍然把其余全人类逐出教门——因为世人都归附了凯基利安与“交经者”那不虔的一党，而凯基利安所谓的祝圣，正是出自这些交经者之手。他们信心十足、几近扬扬得意地宣称：使徒统绪已然中断；欧洲与亚洲“所有”主教都染上了罪咎与分裂的瘟疫；而大公教会的种种特权，如今只归于阿非利加信徒中的这一小撮蒙拣选者——唯有他们完好无损地守住了纯正的信仰与戒规。支撑这套僵硬教义的，是最不近人情的种种行径。每逢收得一名新信徒，哪怕来自遥远的东方各行省，他们也必一丝不苟地重行洗礼⁸与祝圣的圣仪；因为他们不承认此人先前从异端或分裂派手中所受之礼的效力。主教、贞女，乃至纯洁无瑕的婴孩，都得先蒙受当众补赎之辱，方能获准加入多纳图斯派的团契。若夺得一座原为大公教会对手所用的教堂，他们便如同净化一座偶像神庙一般，同样热切、同样煞费苦心地涤净这座“不洁”的建筑。他们冲洗地面，刮净墙壁，焚毁祭坛（通常为木制），熔化祝圣过的圣器，还把圣餐饼掷给狗吃——凡足以激起并延续教派仇恨的种种羞辱手段，无所不用其极。⁹ 尽管彼此仇隙不可调和，这两派在阿非利加各城中既杂处又分立，却操着同样的语言、有着同样的风习，怀着同样的热忱与学识，持守同样的信仰与礼拜。多纳图斯派虽遭帝国政教两界明令取缔，却在若干行省——尤其是努米底亚——仍保持着人数上的优势；有四百名主教承认其首席主教的管辖。然而这一教派那股不可折服的气性，有时竟反噬自身：他们那分裂而成的教会，胸腹之内又被内讧撕裂。多纳图斯派的主教中，有四分之一另立门户，追随马克西米安派的旗号。他们最初的首领所划出的那条狭窄而孤僻的道路，就这样一步步偏离了人类的广大群体。就连微不足道、几乎无人察觉的罗加提安派，也能面不改色地断言：待到基督降临审判大地之时，他会发现自己的真宗只在毛里塔尼亚·凯撒里恩西斯几座无名村落里得以保全。¹⁰

The schism of the Donatists was confined to Africa: the more diffusive mischief of the Trinitarian controversy successively penetrated into every part of the Christian world. The former was an accidental quarrel, occasioned by the abuse of freedom; the latter was a high and mysterious argument, derived from the abuse of philosophy. From the age of Constantine to that of Clovis and Theodoric, the temporal interests both of the Romans and Barbarians were deeply involved in the theological disputes of Arianism. The historian may therefore be permitted respectfully to withdraw the veil of the sanctuary; and to deduce the progress of reason and faith, of error and passion from the school of Plato, to the decline and fall of the empire.

多纳图斯派的分裂，尚局限于阿非利加一隅；而三位一体之争，其祸害弥漫得更广，渐次渗入基督教世界的每一个角落。前者不过是一场偶发的口角，起于对自由的滥用；后者却是一桩高深莫测的论辩，源自对哲学的滥用。从君士坦丁的时代，直到克洛维与狄奥多里克的时代，罗马人与蛮族的现世利害，都深深纠缠于阿里乌斯派的神学争端之中。因此，容史家恭敬地掀开圣所的帷幕，追溯理性与信仰、谬误与激情的来龙去脉——从柏拉图的学园，一直追到这帝国的衰亡。

The genius of Plato, informed by his own meditation, or by the traditional knowledge of the priests of Egypt, ¹¹ had ventured to explore the mysterious nature of the Deity. When he had elevated his mind to the sublime contemplation of the first self-existent, necessary cause of the universe, the Athenian sage was incapable of conceiving how the simple unity of his essence could admit the infinite variety of distinct and successive ideas which compose the model of the intellectual world; how a Being purely incorporeal could execute that perfect model, and mould with a plastic hand the rude and independent chaos. The vain hope of extricating himself from these difficulties, which must ever oppress the feeble powers of the human mind, might induce Plato to consider the divine nature under the threefold modification—of the first cause, the reason, or Logos, and the soul or spirit of the universe. His poetical imagination sometimes fixed and animated these metaphysical abstractions; the three archical on original principles were represented in the Platonic system as three Gods, united with each other by a mysterious and ineffable generation; and the Logos was particularly considered under the more accessible character of the Son of an Eternal Father, and the Creator and Governor of the world. Such appear to have been the secret doctrines which were cautiously whispered in the gardens of the academy; and which, according to the more recent disciples of Plato, ¹¹¹¹ could not be perfectly understood, till after an assiduous study of thirty years. ¹²

柏拉图天赋异禀，或凭一己之冥思，或藉埃及祭司世代相传的学问，¹¹ 竟敢探究神那玄秘的本性。当这位雅典哲人把心神提升到崇高的沉思，去默想那宇宙的第一因——自本自根、不得不有的本原时，他却无从设想：其本质既是单纯的“一”，究竟“如何”能容下那构成理智世界之范型的、无穷无尽而又各各分明、层层相续的理念；一个纯然无形之存在，又“如何”能实现那完美的范型，并以塑造之手把粗糙而自在的混沌捏成形体。这些难题必将永远压迫着人类心智那点微弱之力；柏拉图或许正是徒怀摆脱之望，才把神性设想为三重形态——即第一因、理性（亦即 Logos，逻各斯）、以及宇宙的灵魂或精神。他那诗意的想象，有时把这些形而上的抽象凝定下来、赋予生气；在柏拉图体系里，那三个“本原”（archical，即原初本原）被表现为三位神，彼此以一种神秘而不可言喻的“生成”相连结；其中逻各斯尤被赋予一副较易理解的面貌——永恒之父的圣子，以及世界的造物主与主宰。这些似乎便是当年在学园的园圃间悄声密授的隐秘学说；而据柏拉图较晚近的门徒所言，¹¹¹¹ 非得潜心研习三十年，方能透彻领会。¹²

The arms of the Macedonians diffused over Asia and Egypt the language and learning of Greece; and the theological system of Plato was taught, with less reserve, and perhaps with some improvements, in the celebrated school of Alexandria. ¹³ A numerous colony of Jews had been invited, by the favor of the Ptolemies, to settle in their new capital. ¹⁴ While the bulk of the nation practised the legal ceremonies, and pursued the lucrative occupations of commerce, a few Hebrews, of a more liberal spirit, devoted their lives to religious and philosophical contemplation. ¹⁵ They cultivated with diligence, and embraced with ardor, the theological system of the Athenian sage. But their national pride would have been mortified by a fair confession of their former poverty: and they boldly marked, as the sacred inheritance of their ancestors, the gold and jewels which they had so lately stolen from their Egyptian masters. One hundred years before the birth of Christ, a philosophical treatise, which manifestly betrays the style and sentiments of the school of Plato, was produced by the Alexandrian Jews, and unanimously received as a genuine and valuable relic of the inspired Wisdom of Solomon. ¹⁶ A similar union of the Mosaic faith and the Grecian philosophy, distinguishes the works of Philo, which were composed, for the most part, under the reign of Augustus. ¹⁷ The material soul of the universe ¹⁸ might offend the piety of the Hebrews: but they applied the character of the Logos to the Jehovah of Moses and the patriarchs; and the Son of God was introduced upon earth under a visible, and even human appearance, to perform those familiar offices which seem incompatible with the nature and attributes of the Universal Cause. ¹⁹

马其顿人的兵锋，把希腊的语言与学问播撒到亚细亚与埃及；柏拉图的神学体系，也在著名的亚历山大里亚学派中传授，较少顾忌，或许还有所增益。¹³ 托勒密诸王加恩，招来一大批犹太侨民，让他们定居在自己的新都。¹⁴ 这个民族的大多数人恪守律法仪节，又经营着获利丰厚的商贾之业；却有少数几个心胸较为开阔的希伯来人，倾其一生投入宗教与哲学的沉思。¹⁵ 他们勤勉钻研、热忱拥抱那位雅典哲人的神学体系。然而，若老老实实承认自己昔日的贫乏，未免要挫伤这个民族的自尊；于是他们索性把这些不久前刚从埃及主人那里窃来的金银珠宝，昂然标榜为祖上传下的神圣遗产。基督诞生前一百年，亚历山大里亚的犹太人炮制出一部哲学论著，其文风与旨趣分明透着柏拉图学派的痕迹，却被众口一词地奉为受神启迪的《所罗门智训》流传下来的一件珍贵真品。¹⁶ 斐洛的著作也同样把摩西的信仰与希腊哲学熔于一炉，其中大半成书于奥古斯都在位之时。¹⁷ “宇宙的物质灵魂”¹⁸一说，或许有伤希伯来人的虔敬；但他们却把逻各斯的身份，安到摩西与列祖所奉的耶和华身上；于是上帝之子便以可见、甚至具人形的样貌降临尘世，去履行那些看似与“万有之因”的本性和属性格格不入的日常职分。¹⁹

Notes 注释

Eusebius in Vit. Constantin. l. iii. c. 63, 64, 65, 66.

优西比乌，《君士坦丁传》（Vit. Constantin.），l. iii. c. 63, 64, 65, 66。

After some examination of the various opinions of Tillemont, Beausobre, Lardner, &c., I am convinced that Manes did not propagate his sect, even in Persia, before the year 270. It is strange, that a philosophic and foreign heresy should have penetrated so rapidly into the African provinces; yet I cannot easily reject the edict of Diocletian against the Manichæans, which may be found in Baronius. (Annal Eccl. A. D. 287.)

细察蒂耶蒙、博索布尔、拉德纳等人的种种见解之后，我确信：摩尼即便在波斯，也是到公元 270 年才开始传布其教派的。奇怪的是，这样一种带哲学色彩的外来异端，竟能如此迅速地渗入阿非利加各行省；然而戴克里先针对摩尼教徒所颁的那道敕令，我却难以轻易否定——其文见于巴罗尼乌斯《教会编年史》（Annal. Eccl. A. D. 287）。

Constantinus enim, cum limatius superstitionum quæroret sectas, Manichæorum et similium, &c. Ammian. xv. 15. Strategius, who from this commission obtained the surname of Musonianus, was a Christian of the Arian sect. He acted as one of the counts at the council of Sardica. Libanius praises his mildness and prudence. Vales. ad locum Ammian.

Constantinus enim, cum limatius superstitionum quæroret sectas, Manichæorum et similium, &c.〔君士坦丁因欲更精细地稽考各种迷信教派，如摩尼教徒及其同类，等等。〕（阿米阿努斯，xv. 15。）斯特拉特吉乌斯因这桩差事而得了“Musonianus”（穆索尼安努斯）的别名，他是阿里乌派的基督徒，曾以钦命伯爵之一的身份出席萨尔迪卡会议。利巴尼乌斯称许他为人温和、处事审慎。见瓦莱修斯对阿米阿努斯该处的注释（Vales. ad locum Ammian.）。

Cod. Theod. l. xvi. tit. 5, leg. 2. As the general law is not inserted in the Theodosian Code, it probable that, in the year 438, the sects which it had condemned were already extinct.

《狄奥多西法典》（Cod. Theod.），l. xvi. tit. 5, leg. 2。这道通例既未收入《狄奥多西法典》，想必到公元 438 年，它所定罪的各派早已绝迹。

Sozomen, l. i. c. 22. Socrates, l. i. c. 10. These historians have been suspected, but I think without reason, of an attachment to the Novatian doctrine. The emperor said to the bishop, “Acesius, take a ladder, and get up to heaven by yourself.” Most of the Christian sects have, by turns, borrowed the ladder of Acesius.

索佐门，l. i. c. 22。苏格拉底，l. i. c. 10。有人怀疑这两位史家偏袒诺洼天派的教义，我以为此说没有根据。皇帝对那位主教说：“阿凯西乌斯，搬一架梯子，自己爬上天堂去吧。”基督教各派后来大多轮番借用过阿凯西乌斯这架梯子。

The best materials for this part of ecclesiastical history may be found in the edition of Optatus Milevitanus, published (Paris, 1700) by M. Dupin, who has enriched it with critical notes, geographical discussions, original records, and an accurate abridgment of the whole controversy. M. de Tillemont has bestowed on the Donatists the greatest part of a volume, (tom. vi. part i.;) and I am indebted to him for an ample collection of all the passages of his favorite St. Augustin, which relate to those heretics.

研究这一段教会史，最好的材料见于迪潘先生所编、于 1700 年在巴黎出版的米莱维斯的奥普塔图斯文集（Optatus Milevitanus）；他为该书增添了批判性注释、地理考订、原始记录，并对整场争端作了准确的节述。蒂耶蒙先生则用了大半卷篇幅论述多纳图斯派（tom. vi. part i.）；他所钟爱的圣奥古斯丁凡涉及这些异端的段落，他都网罗殆尽，我对此深为感激。

Schisma igitur illo tempore confusæ mulieris iracundia peperit; ambitus nutrivit; avaritia roboravit. Optatus, l. i. c. 19. The language of Purpurius is that of a furious madman. Dicitur te necasse lilios sororis tuæ duos. Purpurius respondit: Putas me terreri a te.. occidi; et occido eos qui contra me faciunt. Acta Concil. Cirtenais, ad calc. Optat. p. 274. When Cæcilian was invited to an assembly of bishops, Purpurius said to his brethren, or rather to his accomplices, “Let him come hither to receive our imposition of hands, and we will break his head by way of penance.” Optat. l. i. c. 19.

Schisma igitur illo tempore confusæ mulieris iracundia peperit; ambitus nutrivit; avaritia roboravit.〔可见这场分裂当日乃是由一个失了理智的妇人的怒气所生，由野心所养，由贪婪所壮。〕（奥普塔图斯，l. i. c. 19。）普尔普里乌斯的言辞，俨然出自一个暴怒的疯子之口。Dicitur te necasse lilios sororis tuæ duos. Purpurius respondit: Putas me terreri a te.. occidi; et occido eos qui contra me faciunt.〔据说你杀了你姐妹的两个儿子。普尔普里乌斯答道：你以为我会怕你？……我杀过人；凡与我作对者，我照杀不误。〕（《西尔塔宗教会议纪要》，附于奥普塔图斯书末，p. 274。）当凯基利安受邀出席一次主教集会时，普尔普里乌斯对他的弟兄——或者不如说对他的同谋——说：“让他到这儿来，受我们按手；我们要以补赎为名，敲破他的脑袋。”（奥普塔图斯，l. i. c. 19。）

The councils of Arles, of Nice, and of Trent, confirmed the wise and moderate practice of the church of Rome. The Donatists, however, had the advantage of maintaining the sentiment of Cyprian, and of a considerable part of the primitive church. Vincentius Lirinesis (p. 532, ap. Tillemont, Mém. Eccles. tom. vi. p. 138) has explained why the Donatists are eternally burning with the Devil, while St. Cyprian reigns in heaven with Jesus Christ.

阿尔勒、尼西亚与特兰托三次宗教会议，都确认了罗马教会那明智而稳健的做法。不过多纳图斯派也占着一点便宜：他们所持的，正是西普里安以及相当一部分原始教会的主张。勒兰的文森修斯（p. 532，转引自蒂耶蒙《教会史论集》tom. vi. p. 138）曾解释：何以多纳图斯派要与魔鬼一同永焚，而圣西普里安却与耶稣基督一同在天国为王。

See the sixth book of Optatus Milevitanus, p. 91-100.

见米莱维斯的奥普塔图斯（Optatus Milevitanus）第六卷，p. 91-100。

Tillemont, Mém. Ecclésiastiques, tom. vi. part i. p. 253. He laughs at their partial credulity. He revered Augustin, the great doctor of the system of predestination.

蒂耶蒙，《教会史论集》，tom. vi. part i. p. 253。他讥笑这些人偏执的轻信。他景仰奥古斯丁——这位预定论体系的伟大导师。

Plato Ægyptum peragravit ut a sacerdotibus Barbaris numeros et cælestia acciperet. Cicero de Finibus, v. 25. The Egyptians might still preserve the traditional creed of the Patriarchs. Josephus has persuaded many of the Christian fathers, that Plato derived a part of his knowledge from the Jews; but this vain opinion cannot be reconciled with the obscure state and unsocial manners of the Jewish people, whose scriptures were not accessible to Greek curiosity till more than one hundred years after the death of Plato. See Marsham Canon. Chron. p. 144 Le Clerc, Epistol. Critic. vii. p. 177-194.

Plato Ægyptum peragravit ut a sacerdotibus Barbaris numeros et cælestia acciperet.〔柏拉图遍游埃及，为的是向那些异邦祭司领受数理与天文之学。〕（西塞罗《论善恶之极》，v. 25。）埃及人或许仍保存着列祖世代相传的信条。约瑟夫斯曾使许多基督教教父信以为真，以为柏拉图有一部分学问得自犹太人；但这一妄见，却与犹太民族当时那种湮没无闻、离群索居的状况难以相容——直到柏拉图死后一百多年，希腊人的好奇心才得以接触到他们的经典。参见马香《编年经典》（Canon. Chron.）p. 144；勒克莱尔《批判书简》（Epistol. Critic.）vii. p. 177-194。

1111

This exposition of the doctrine of Plato appears to me contrary to the true sense of that philosopher’s writings. The brilliant imagination which he carried into metaphysical inquiries, his style, full of allegories and figures, have misled those interpreters who did not seek, from the whole tenor of his works and beyond the images which the writer employs, the system of this philosopher. In my opinion, there is no Trinity in Plato; he has established no mysterious generation between the three pretended principles which he is made to distinguish. Finally, he conceives only as attributes of the Deity, or of matter, those ideas, of which it is supposed that he made substances, real beings.
According to Plato, God and matter existed from all eternity. Before the creation of the world, matter had in itself a principle of motion, but without end or laws: it is this principle which Plato calls the irrational soul of the world, because, according to his doctrine, every spontaneous and original principle of motion is called soul. God wished to impress form upon matter, that is to say, 1. To mould matter, and make it into a body; 2. To regulate its motion, and subject it to some end and to certain laws. The Deity, in this operation, could not act but according to the ideas existing in his intelligence: their union filled this, and formed the ideal type of the world. It is this ideal world, this divine intelligence, existing with God from all eternity, and called by Plato which he is supposed to personify, to substantialize; while an attentive examination is sufficient to convince us that he has never assigned it an existence external to the Deity, (hors de la Divinité,) and that he considered the as the aggregate of the ideas of God, the divine understanding in its relation to the world. The contrary opinion is irreconcilable with all his philosophy: thus he says (Timæus, p. 348, edit. Bip.) that to the idea of the Deity is essentially united that of intelligence, of a logos. He would thus have admitted a double logos; one inherent in the Deity as an attribute, the other independently existing as a substance. He affirms that the intelligence, the principle of order cannot exist but as an attribute of a soul, the principle of motion and of life, of which the nature is unknown to us. How, then, according to this, could he consider the logos as a substance endowed with an independent existence? In other places, he explains it by these two words, knowledge, science, and intelligence which signify the attributes of the Deity. When Plato separates God, the ideal archetype of the world and matter, it is to explain how, according to his system, God has proceeded, at the creation, to unite the principle of order which he had within himself, his proper intelligence, the principle of motion, to the principle of motion, the irrational soul which was in matter. When he speaks of the place occupied by the ideal world, it is to designate the divine intelligence, which is its cause. Finally, in no part of his writings do we find a true personification of the pretended beings of which he is said to have formed a trinity: and if this personification existed, it would equally apply to many other notions, of which might be formed many different trinities.
This error, into which many ancient as well as modern interpreters of Plato have fallen, was very natural. Besides the snares which were concealed in his figurative style; besides the necessity of comprehending as a whole the system of his ideas, and not to explain isolated passages, the nature of his doctrine itself would conduce to this error. When Plato appeared, the uncertainty of human knowledge, and the continual illusions of the senses, were acknowledged, and had given rise to a general scepticism. Socrates had aimed at raising morality above the influence of this scepticism: Plato endeavored to save metaphysics, by seeking in the human intellect a source of certainty which the senses could not furnish. He invented the system of innate ideas, of which the aggregate formed, according to him, the ideal world, and affirmed that these ideas were real attributes, not only attached to our conceptions of objects, but to the nature of the objects themselves; a nature of which from them we might obtain a knowledge. He gave, then, to these ideas a positive existence as attributes; his commentators could easily give them a real existence as substances; especially as the terms which he used to designate them, essential beauty, essential goodness, lent themselves to this substantialization, (hypostasis.)—G.
We have retained this view of the original philosophy of Plato, in which there is probably much truth. The genius of Plato was rather metaphysical than impersonative: his poetry was in his language, rather than, like that of the Orientals, in his conceptions.—M.

在我看来，上文对柏拉图学说的这番阐释，有违这位哲学家著作的本意。他把光彩夺目的想象力带进形而上学的探究，文风又满是譬喻与比兴；于是那些解读者若不从其著作的整体脉络着眼、不越过作者所用的意象去把握，便会被引入歧途。依我之见，柏拉图那里并没有什么三位一体；他也不曾在人们硬派给他区分的那三个所谓本原之间，设立什么神秘的“生成”。总之，那些被认为经他化作“实体”、化作真实存在物的理念，他其实只当作神或物质的“属性”来构想。
按柏拉图之说，神与物质自亘古便已存在。世界受造之前，物质自身已含一种运动的本原，却无目的、无法则可言：柏拉图正是把这一本原称作“世界的非理性灵魂”，因为照他的学说，凡自发而原初的运动本原，都称之为灵魂。神欲把“形式”赋予物质，也就是说：其一，塑造物质，使之成为形体；其二，规范其运动，使之趋向某种目的、遵循某些法则。神在这一施为之中，除了依照其理智中既有的理念，别无他法可行：这些理念的总和充盈其间，构成了世界的理想范型。正是这个理想世界、这个神圣理智，自亘古便与神共在；柏拉图为它命了名，据说还将其人格化、实体化。然而只需细加审察，便足以使我们确信：他从未赋予它一种外在于神（hors de la Divinité）的存在，而是把它看作神的诸理念之总和，是神的理智在与世界相关联时的那一面。相反的看法，与他的全部哲学都无法调和：所以他说（《蒂迈欧篇》，p. 348，比庞版），神的理念本质上与理智、与一种 logos（逻各斯）的理念相连。如此一来，他便承认了双重的 logos：一个作为属性内在于神，另一个则作为实体独立存在。他断言：理智，即秩序的本原，只能作为灵魂的一种属性而存在，而灵魂乃是运动与生命的本原，其本性则非我们所能知。既然如此，他又怎会把 logos 看作一个独立自存的实体呢？在别的地方，他又用这样几个词来解释它：知识、学问、理智——凡此都指神的属性。柏拉图把神、世界的理想原型与物质加以区分时，是为了说明：按其体系，神在创世之际，如何把他内在固有的秩序本原——即他自身的理智——与那运动的本原、亦即物质之中的非理性灵魂，结合起来。当他谈到理想世界所占的“位置”时，所指的乃是作为其成因的神圣理智。总而言之，在他著作的任何地方，我们都找不到对那些所谓存在物的真正人格化——据说他正是用它们凑成了一个三位一体；况且这种人格化即便当真存在，也同样适用于许多别的概念，由之尽可拼凑出形形色色的三位一体来。
无论古今，许多柏拉图的解读者都落入了这一谬误，这原是十分自然的。除了他那比喻性文风中暗藏的种种陷阱，除了必须把他的思想体系作为整体来把握、而不能孤立地解说个别段落之外，他学说本身的性质，也会助长这一谬误。柏拉图登场之时，人类知识之不可靠、感官幻象之层出不穷，已是公认的事实，并由此滋生出一种普遍的怀疑主义。苏格拉底曾力图把道德从这种怀疑主义的影响下解救出来；柏拉图则致力于拯救形而上学，方法是到人的理智中去寻找一个感官无从提供的确定性之源。他发明了天赋理念之说；照他看来，这些理念的总和构成了理想世界。他断言，这些理念乃是真实的属性，不仅系于我们对事物的观念，更系于事物本身的本性——而藉着这些理念，我们便可对那本性有所认识。于是他赋予这些理念一种作为属性的实在存在；而他的注疏者便很容易进一步赋予它们一种作为实体的真实存在——尤其因为他用以指称这些理念的字眼，如“美本身”“善本身”，本就便于这样的实体化（hypostasis，即“位格化”）。——G
关于柏拉图本来哲学的这一看法，我们予以保留，其中大概不乏真理。柏拉图的天才偏于形而上，而不擅人格化；他的诗意存乎其文辞，而非如东方人那样，寓于其观念之中。——M

The modern guides who lead me to the knowledge of the Platonic system are Cudworth, Basnage, Le Clerc, and Brucker. As the learning of these writers was equal, and their intention different, an inquisitive observer may derive instruction from their disputes, and certainty from their agreement.

引导我了解柏拉图体系的近世向导，是卡德沃思、巴纳日、勒克莱尔与布鲁克。这几位学者学识相当，用意各异；好问深思者尽可从他们的争辩中获得教益，从他们的一致中获得确信。

Brucker, Hist. Philosoph. tom. i. p. 1349-1357. The Alexandrian school is celebrated by Strabo (l. xvii.) and Ammianus, (xxii. 6.) Note: The philosophy of Plato was not the only source of that professed in the school of Alexandria. That city, in which Greek, Jewish, and Egyptian men of letters were assembled, was the scene of a strange fusion of the system of these three people. The Greeks brought a Platonism, already much changed; the Jews, who had acquired at Babylon a great number of Oriental notions, and whose theological opinions had undergone great changes by this intercourse, endeavored to reconcile Platonism with their new doctrine, and disfigured it entirely: lastly, the Egyptians, who were not willing to abandon notions for which the Greeks themselves entertained respect, endeavored on their side to reconcile their own with those of their neighbors. It is in Ecclesiasticus and the Wisdom of Solomon that we trace the influence of Oriental philosophy rather than that of Platonism. We find in these books, and in those of the later prophets, as in Ezekiel, notions unknown to the Jews before the Babylonian captivity, of which we do not discover the germ in Plato, but which are manifestly derived from the Orientals. Thus God represented under the image of light, and the principle of evil under that of darkness; the history of the good and bad angels; paradise and hell, &c., are doctrines of which the origin, or at least the positive determination, can only be referred to the Oriental philosophy. Plato supposed matter eternal; the Orientals and the Jews considered it as a creation of God, who alone was eternal. It is impossible to explain the philosophy of the Alexandrian school solely by the blending of the Jewish theology with the Greek philosophy. The Oriental philosophy, however little it may be known, is recognized at every instant. Thus, according to the Zend Avesta, it is by the Word (honover) more ancient than the world, that Ormuzd created the universe. This word is the logos of Philo, consequently very different from that of Plato. I have shown that Plato never personified the logos as the ideal archetype of the world: Philo ventured this personification. The Deity, according to him, has a double logos; the first is the ideal archetype of the world, the ideal world, the first-born of the Deity; the second is the word itself of God, personified under the image of a being acting to create the sensible world, and to make it like to the ideal world: it is the second-born of God. Following out his imaginations, Philo went so far as to personify anew the ideal world, under the image of a celestial man, the primitive type of man, and the sensible world under the image of another man less perfect than the celestial man. Certain notions of the Oriental philosophy may have given rise to this strange abuse of allegory, which it is sufficient to relate, to show what alterations Platonism had already undergone, and what was their source. Philo, moreover, of all the Jews of Alexandria, is the one whose Platonism is the most pure. It is from this mixture of Orientalism, Platonism, and Judaism, that Gnosticism arose, which had produced so many theological and philosophical extravagancies, and in which Oriental notions evidently predominate.—G.

布鲁克，《哲学史》（Hist. Philosoph.），tom. i. p. 1349-1357。亚历山大里亚学派曾为斯特拉波（l. xvii.）与阿米阿努斯（xxii. 6）所称道。编者按：亚历山大里亚学派所奉行的哲学，其源头并不止于柏拉图。那座城市汇聚了希腊、犹太与埃及三方的文人，遂成为这三个民族思想体系奇异交融的舞台。希腊人带来的，是一套早已大为走样的柏拉图主义；犹太人则在巴比伦习得了大量东方观念，其神学见解经此交往已生巨变，他们竭力把柏拉图主义与自己的新教义相调和，结果把它弄得面目全非；最后，埃及人也不甘舍弃那些连希腊人都为之敬重的观念，便也从自己一方着手，把本族的观念与邻人的观念相调和。在《便西拉智训》与《所罗门智训》中，我们所能追溯到的，与其说是柏拉图主义的影响，不如说是东方哲学的影响。在这些书中，以及在后期先知——如以西结——的书中，我们发现了一些巴比伦之囚以前的犹太人所不知道的观念；这些观念的萌芽在柏拉图那里遍寻不见，却分明源自东方各族。例如：把上帝表现为光的形象，把恶的本原表现为黑暗的形象；善天使与恶天使的故事；天堂与地狱，等等——这些教义的起源，至少其确切成形，都只能归之于东方哲学。柏拉图假定物质是永恒的；东方各族与犹太人却认为物质乃上帝所造，唯有上帝才是永恒的。若仅以犹太神学与希腊哲学的糅合来解释亚历山大里亚学派的哲学，是断然行不通的。东方哲学纵然鲜为人知，却在其中处处可辨。例如，据《曾德阿维斯塔》所载，奥尔穆兹德正是藉着那先于世界而存在的“圣言”（honover，即“神言”）创造了宇宙。这个“圣言”便是斐洛的逻各斯，因而与柏拉图的逻各斯大相径庭。我已表明，柏拉图从不曾把逻各斯人格化为世界的理想原型；斐洛却敢于作此人格化。照他看来，上帝有双重逻各斯：第一重是世界的理想原型，即那理想世界，是上帝的“长子”；第二重则是上帝之道本身，被人格化为一个存在者，其作为便是创造那可感的世界，并使之肖似理想世界——这便是上帝的“次子”。斐洛顺着自己的想象一路推衍，竟至于把理想世界重新加以人格化，表现为一个“天上之人”，即人的原初范型；又把可感世界表现为另一个人，其完美程度逊于那天上之人。东方哲学的某些观念，或许正是这种对寓意的离奇滥用之由来；而只需把它叙述出来，便足以见出柏拉图主义已经历了怎样的变异，以及这些变异的根源何在。再者，在亚历山大里亚的全体犹太人当中，斐洛乃是柏拉图主义最为纯正的一位。正是从东方主义、柏拉图主义与犹太教的这一混合物中，产生了诺斯替主义；它孕育出无数神学与哲学上的怪诞之论，而其中东方观念显然占着上风。——G

Joseph. Antiquitat, l. xii. c. 1, 3. Basnage, Hist. des Juifs, l. vii. c. 7.

约瑟夫斯，《犹太古史》（Antiquitat.），l. xii. c. 1, 3。巴纳日，《犹太人史》（Hist. des Juifs），l. vii. c. 7。

For the origin of the Jewish philosophy, see Eusebius, Præparat. Evangel. viii. 9, 10. According to Philo, the Therapeutæ studied philosophy; and Brucker has proved (Hist. Philosoph. tom. ii. p. 787) that they gave the preference to that of Plato.

论犹太哲学之起源，见优西比乌《福音之准备》（Præparat. Evangel.），viii. 9, 10。据斐洛所言，特拉普提派研习哲学；布鲁克则已证明（《哲学史》，tom. ii. p. 787），他们尤为推重柏拉图的哲学。

See Calmet, Dissertations sur la Bible, tom. ii. p. 277. The book of the Wisdom of Solomon was received by many of the fathers as the work of that monarch: and although rejected by the Protestants for want of a Hebrew original, it has obtained, with the rest of the Vulgate, the sanction of the council of Trent.

见卡尔梅，《圣经论集》（Dissertations sur la Bible），tom. ii. p. 277。《所罗门智训》一书，许多教父都当作那位君王（所罗门）的手笔而予以接纳；新教徒虽以其没有希伯来文原本为由加以摒弃，它却与《武加大译本》其余各卷一道，得到了特兰托会议的认可。

The Platonism of Philo, which was famous to a proverb, is proved beyond a doubt by Le Clerc, (Epist. Crit. viii. p. 211-228.) Basnage (Hist. des Juifs, l. iv. c. 5) has clearly ascertained, that the theological works of Philo were composed before the death, and most probably before the birth, of Christ. In such a time of darkness, the knowledge of Philo is more astonishing than his errors. Bull, Defens. Fid. Nicen. s. i. c. i. p. 12.

斐洛的柏拉图主义早已声名远播，几成谚语；勒克莱尔（Epist. Crit. viii. p. 211-228）已确证无疑。巴纳日（《犹太人史》，l. iv. c. 5）则明白地考定：斐洛的神学著作成书于基督死前，而且极可能在基督降生之前。在那样一个蒙昧的时代，斐洛的博学比他的谬误更令人惊叹。见布尔《尼西亚信仰辩护》（Defens. Fid. Nicen.），s. i. c. i. p. 12。

Mens agitat molem, et magno se corpore miscet. Besides this material soul, Cudworth has discovered (p. 562) in Amelius, Porphyry, Plotinus, and, as he thinks, in Plato himself, a superior, spiritual upercosmian soul of the universe. But this double soul is exploded by Brucker, Basnage, and Le Clerc, as an idle fancy of the latter Platonists.

Mens agitat molem, et magno se corpore miscet.〔心智鼓动着质料，又与这庞大的形体交融。〕除了这个物质灵魂之外，卡德沃思还在阿梅利乌斯、波菲利、普罗提诺——照他看来，甚至在柏拉图本人——那里，发现了一个更高的、属灵的“upercosmian”（超宇宙的）宇宙灵魂（p. 562）。但这种双重灵魂之说，已被布鲁克、巴纳日与勒克莱尔斥为晚期柏拉图派的无稽妄想。

Petav. Dogmata Theologica, tom. ii. l. viii. c. 2, p. 791. Bull, Defens. Fid. Nicen. s. i. c. l. p. 8, 13. This notion, till it was abused by the Arians, was freely adopted in the Christian theology. Tertullian (adv. Praxeam, c. 16) has a remarkable and dangerous passage. After contrasting, with indiscreet wit, the nature of God, and the actions of Jehovah, he concludes: Scilicet ut hæc de filio Dei non credenda fuisse, si non scripta essent; fortasse non credenda de l’atre licet scripta. * Note: Tertullian is here arguing against the Patripassians; those who asserted that the Father was born of the Virgin, died and was buried.—M.

佩塔维乌斯，《神学教义》（Dogmata Theologica），tom. ii. l. viii. c. 2, p. 791。布尔，《尼西亚信仰辩护》（Defens. Fid. Nicen.），s. i. c. l. p. 8, 13。这一观念，在被阿里乌斯派滥用之前，本可在基督教神学中自由采纳。德尔图良（《驳普拉克塞阿斯》，c. 16）有一段值得注意而又危险的文字。他以失之轻率的机锋，把上帝的本性与耶和华的作为一番对照之后，断言道：Scilicet ut hæc de filio Dei non credenda fuisse, si non scripta essent; fortasse non credenda de Patre licet scripta.〔可见关于上帝之子的这些事，若非见诸经文，本是不可信的；至于圣父，纵然见诸经文，或许也仍不可信。〕* 编者按：德尔图良此处是在反驳圣父受苦派，即那些主张圣父由童贞女所生、并且受死埋葬的人。——M

Chapter XXI: Persecution Of Heresy, State Of The Church.—Part I. 第二十一章 对异端的迫害；教会的状况——第一节