to the hatred to

which truth is exposed, is the offence which is given by him, who faithfully maintains truth. But he who perverts and corrupts the truth, by that very action obtains the favour of those who oppose truth, by deriding and contemning it. The philosophers affect to imitate the truth, but by that very imitation they corrupt it; since they seek only vain glory. Christians, on the other hand, necessarily seek truth, and maintain it with constancy, since they regard their own salvation.

Hence we are not, as ye suppose, like the philosophers, either in our doctrine or in our discipline. For what certain knowledge did Thales, the prince of natural philosophers, give to Croesus, who enquired of him respecting the Divinity? Did he not disappoint his expectations, by requesting to delay his answer, without effect? Now the meanest Christian knows and can declare what God is; and hence he can actually show that which is sought by those who endeavour to find out God: although Plato declares that it is not easy to discover the Maker of the Universe, and most difficult, when discovered, to make him known to others.

Again, if a comparison is made between our chastity and that of the philosophers, I read a part of the sentence pronounced by the Athenians against Socrates, in which he is called a

corruptor of youth. The love of a Christian is confined to its proper and natural objects. Diogenes himself is accused of gratifying a base passion with the harlot Phryne. A certain Speusippus, of the school of Plato, is said to have perished in the act of adultery. A Christian knows none but his own wife. Democritus blinded himself, because he could not look upon women without desire, and was grieved if he could not satisfy his passion; thus declaring his incontinence, by the very means which he took to amend it. But a Christian, without injuring his eyes, looks not upon women; in his mind he is blind to lust.

If I am to defend Christians against the accusation of pride, we may see Diogenes treading upon the proud couches of Plato, with muddy feet; thus displaying, by that very action, pride of another kind a Christian shews no pride, even towards the poor. If there is any question respecting moderation, we may appeal to Pythagoras among the Thurians, and Zeno among the people of Priene, each affecting absolute power. A Christian is not ambitious of the meanest office. If a comparison is proposed respecting the equanimity of the Christian and the philosopher; Lycurgus chose his life to be shortened, because the Spartans amended his laws; the Christian, even when condemned to

a

• Tertullian gives the same account of Lycurgus in c. 4.

death, returns thanks. If a question is made respecting the fidelity of each; Anaxagoras denied a pledge to his guests; a Christian is acknowledged to be faithful, even to strangers. If I am to defend Christians upon the ground of simplicity; Aristotle made his friend Hermias disgracefully give way to himself: a Christian injures not even his enemy. The same Aristotle was as basely subservient in adulation to Alexander, whom he ought rather to have governed, as Plato was to Dionysius, for the sake of his appetite. Aristippus, under an exterior of great gravity, gave himself up to excess, clothed in purple; and Hippias was slain, while he was plotting against the state. No Christian ever had recourse to such means for his fellows, with whatever severity they may be persecuted.

But, some one will say, there are some even among ourselves, who deviate from the strict rules of our discipline. If so, we consider them Christians no longer. Whereas philosophers among yourselves, who do the like, continue to enjoy the name and distinctions attached to the wisdom which they profess.

Such, and no other, is the degree of similitude between a philosopher and a Christian; between a disciple of Greece and of heaven; between one who seeks fame, and one who strives for salvation; between one who confines himself to words, and

one who is virtuous in deeds; between one who builds, and one who destroys; between one who introduces error, and one who supports truth; between one who despoils truth, and one who preserves it.

CHAPTER XLVII.

a

THE antiquity of the sacred scriptures hath been already alleged in our behalf; whence it may easily be believed, that they have been the treasure whence all real wisdom hath been extracted. And unless I were desirous of restraining my work within proper bounds, I might easily expatiate also upon this point of the proof. Who is there of the poets and sophists, who hath not drunk at the fountain of the prophets? Hence, then, the philosophers also have secretly satisfied their thirst of information. For the comparison between us and them is founded upon the fact, that they have some of our opinions. Hence, I imagine, it is, that philosophy was banished by certain laws, as, for instance, by those of Thebes, Sparta, and Argos. While men, whose only passion—as we have said—was the desire of glory and eloquence, thus endeavoured to approach to some of our tenets, if they met with any thing in the sacred scriptures with which they were offended,

A c. 19.

G G