Book III.

1. All these charges, then, which might truly be better termed abuse, have been long answered with sufficient fulness and accuracy by men of distinction in this respect, and worthy to have learned the truth; and not one point of any inquiry has been passed over, without being determined in a thousand ways, and on the strongest grounds. We need not, therefore, linger further on this part of the case. For neither is the Christian religion unable to stand though it found no advocates, nor will it be therefore proved true if it found many to agree with it, and gained weight through its adherents.682    Or, “race,” gens, i.e., the Christian people.    Pl.    The ms., followed by Oehler, reads neque enim res stare…non potest, Christiana religio aut—“for neither can a thing not stand,…nor will the Christian religion,” etc., while L.B. merely changes aut into et—“for neither can a thing, i.e., the Christian religion,…nor will it,” etc. All other edd. read as above, omitting et. Its own strength is sufficient for it, and it rests on the foundations of its own truth, without losing its power, though there were none to defend it, nay, though all voices assailed and opposed it, and united with common rancour to destroy all faith683    The verb mereri, used in this passage, has in Roman writers the idea of merit or excellence of some kind in a person, in virtue of which he is deemed worthy of some favour or advantage; but in ecclesiastical Latin it means, as here, to gain something by the mere favour of God, without any merit of one’s own.    This seems the true rationale of the sentence, viewed in relation to the context. Immediately before, Arnobius suggests that the hatred of Christ by the heathen is unjustifiable, because they had suffered nothing at His hands; now an opponent is supposed to rejoin, “But He has deserved our hatred by assailing our religion.” The introductory particles at enim fully bear this out, from their being regularly used to introduce a rejoinder. Still, by Orelli and other editors the sentence is regarded as interrogative, and in that case would be, “Has He indeed merited our hatred by driving out,” etc., which, however, not merely breaks away from what precedes, but also makes the next sentence somewhat lame. The older editors, too, read it without any mark of interrogation.    According to Crusius and others, the ms. reads finem; but, according to Hild., fidem, as above. in it.

I. Jamdudum quidem criminibus his omnibus, maledictionibus potius, ut vera dicamus ab excellentibus 0938C parte in hac viris, et veritatem istam commeritis nosse, satis plene accurateque responsum est; neque apex ullus ullius praetermissus est quaestionis, qui non sit modis mille et rationibus validissimis refutatus. Non est igitur necessarium parte in hac causae diutius immorari. Neque enim stare sine assertoribus non potest religio christiana? aut eo esse comprobabitur vera, si adstipulatores habuerit plurimos, et auctoritatem ab hominibus sumpserit? Suis illa contenta est viribus, et veritatis propriae fundaminibus nititur: nec spoliatur vi sua, etiamsi 0938D nullum habeat vindicem; immo si linguae omnes contrafaciant, 0939A contraque nitantur, et ad fidem illius abrogandam consensionis unitae animositate conspirent.