Edition Masquer
Contra Faustum Manichaeum libri triginta tres

2.

Sed illos fortasse excuset ignorantia; necdum enim apparente christiana hac fide, quae doceret omnia esse munda mundis, quaedam et ipsi putaverint esse non munda; vos vero, qua nunc excusatione utimini, si Paulo clamante nihil esse non mundum et doctrinas daemoniorum appellante ciborum abstinentiam et mente pollutos vocante, qui aliquid putaverint inquinatum, non solum abstinetis, ut diximus, sed etiam gloriam captatis exinde et eo acceptiores vos creditis Christo, quo eritis abstinentiores a cibis, id est secundum hanc sententiam, quo mentibus inquinati magis et magis conscientia vestra polluti? p. 757,18 Quid, quod etiam cum tres in mundo religiones sint, quae mentis purgationem pariter in castimoniis et abstinentia ritu quamvis diversissimo reponunt, dico autem Iudaeos et christianos et gentes, ex quanam istarum religionum sermo hic veniat, non potest inveniri, qui docet nihil esse non sanctum? Certe ex Iudaismo minime; itidem ex paganismo, quia ipsum quoque discrimen ad cibos (discriminat cibos v.l.); nec quicquam interest, nisi quod Hebraeus in quibusdam animalibus a pagano dissentit. Restat christiana fides, cuius si proprium hoc esse putas nihil existimare pollutum, prius est, ut fatearis in vobis esse neminem christianum; omnes enim apud vos, ut cetera reticeam, morticina tamen et immolata inquinamentum existimant esse non parvum. aut si et a vobis iure christianitatis hoc agitur, ne huius quidem ergo religionis sententia est, quae omnem penitus immundorum abstinentiam tollit. p. 758,9 Quorsum ergo a Paulo id dici potuit, quod nulli sit religioni conveniens? Etenim apostolus non tam religionem exuit quam ritum mutavit, cum ex Iudaeo factus est christianus; at vero qui hoc capitulum scripsit, videtur ille mihi nulla prorsus religione fuisse subnixus.

Traduction Masquer
Reply to Faustus the Manichaean

2.

But perhaps their ignorance may excuse them; for, as this Christian doctrine of all things being pure to the pure had not then appeared, they may have thought some things impure. But there can be no excuse for you in the face of Paul's announcement, that there is nothing which is not pure, and that abstinence from certain food is the doctrine of devils, and that those who think anything defiled are polluted in their mind, if you not only abstain, as we have said, but make a merit of it, and believe that you become more acceptable to Christ in proportion as you are more abstemious, or, according to this new doctrine, as your minds are defiled and your conscience polluted. It should also be observed that, while there are three religions in the world which, though in a very different manner, appoint chastity and abstinence as the means of purification of the mind, the religions, namely, of the Jews, the Gentiles, and the Christians, the opinion that everything is pure cannot have come from any one of the three. It is certainly not from Judaism, nor from Paganism, which also makes a distinction of food; the only difference being, that the Hebrew classification of animals does not harmonize with the Pagan. Then as to the Christian faith, if you think it peculiar to Christianity to consider nothing defiled, you must first of all confess that there are no Christians among you. For things offered to idols, and what dies of itself, to mention nothing else, are regarded by you all as great defilement. If, again, this is a Christian practice, on your part, the doctrine which is opposed to all abstinence from impurities cannot be traced to Christianity either. How, then, could Paul have said what is not in keeping with any religion? In fact, when the apostle from a Jew became a Christian, it was a change of customs more than of religion. As for the writer of this verse, there seems to be no religion which favors his opinion.