Traduction Masquer
The City of God

Chapter 5.--Concerning the More Secret Doctrine of the Pagans, and Concerning the Physical Interpretations.

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, ¹ 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.

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!

Edition Masquer
De civitate Dei (CCSL)

Caput V: De paganorum secretiore doctrina physicisque rationibus.

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 dempserunt 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 huiuscemodi 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. uerum 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.