Edition ausblenden
De civitate Dei (CCSL)

Caput I: Veram beatitudinem siue angelis siue hominibus per unum deum tribui etiam Platonicos definisse; sed utrum hi, quos ob hoc ipsum colendos putant, uni tantum deo, an etiam sibi sacrificari uelint, esse quaerendum.

Omnium certa sententia est, qui ratione quoquo modo uti possunt, beatos esse omnes homines uelle. qui autem sint uel unde fiant dum mortalium quaerit infirmitas, multae magnae que controuersiae concitatae sunt, in quibus philosophi sua studia et otia contriuerunt, quas in medium adducere atque discutere et longum est et non necessarium. si enim recolit qui haec legit, quid in libro egerimus octauo in eligendis philosophis, cum quibus haec de beata uita, quae post mortem futura est, quaestio tractaretur, utrum ad eam uni deo uero, qui etiam effector est deorum, an plurimis dis religione sacrisque seruiendo peruenire possimus: non etiam hic eadem repeti expectat, praesertim cum possit relegendo, si forte oblitus est, adminiculari memoriam. elegimus enim Platonicos omnium philosophorum merito nobilissimos, propterea quia sapere potuerunt licet inmortalem ac rationalem uel intellectualem hominis animam nisi participato lumine illius dei, a quo et ipsa et mundus factus est, beatam esse non posse; ita illud, quod omnes homines adpetunt, id est uitam beatam, quemquam isti adsecuturum negant, qui non illi uni optimo, quod est incommutabilis deus, puritate casti amoris adhaeserit. sed quia ipsi quoque siue cedentes uanitati errorique populorum siue, ut ait apostolus, euanescentes in cogitationibus suis multos deos colendos ita putauerunt uel putari uoluerunt, ut quidam eorum etiam daemonibus diuinos honores sacrorum et sacrificiorum deferendos esse censerent, quibus iam non parua ex parte respondimus: nunc uidendum ac disserendum est, quantum deus donat, inmortales ac beati in caelestibus sedibus dominationibus, principatibus potestatibus constituti, quos isti deos et ex quibus quosdam uel bonos daemones uel nobis cum angelos nominant, quomodo credendi sint uelle a nobis religionem pietatemque seruari; hoc est, ut apertius dicam, utrum etiam sibi an tantum deo suo, qui etiam noster est, placeat eis ut sacra faciamus et sacrificemus, uel aliqua nostra seu nos ipsos religionis ritibus consecremus. hic est enim diuinitati uel, si expressius dicendum est, deitati debitus cultus, propter quem uno uerbo significandum, quoniam mihi satis idoneum non occurrit Latinum, Graeco ubi necesse est insinuo quid uelim dicere. λατρεία quippe nostri, ubicumque sanctarum scripturarum positum est, interpretati sunt seruitutem. sed ea seruitus, quae debetur hominibus, secundum quam praecipit apostolus seruos dominis suis subditos esse debere, alio nomine Graece nuncupari solet; λατρεία uero secundum consuetudinem, qua locuti sunt qui nobis diuina eloquia condiderunt, aut semper aut tam frequenter ut paene semper ea dicitur seruitus, quae pertinet ad colendum deum. proinde si tantummodo cultus ipse dicatur, non soli deo deberi uidetur. dicimur enim colere etiam homines, quos honorifica uel recordatione uel praesentia frequentamus. nec solum ea, quibus nos religiosa humilitate subicimus, sed quaedam etiam, quae subiecta sunt nobis, perhibentur coli. nam ex hoc uerbo et agricolae et coloni et incolae uocantur, et ipsos deos non ob aliud appellant caelicolas, nisi quod caelum colant, non utique uenerando, sed inhabitando, tamquam caeli quosdam colonos; non sicut appellantur coloni, qui condicionem debent genitali solo, propter agriculturam sub dominio possessorum, sed, sicut ait quidam Latini eloquii magnus auctor: urbs antiqua fuit, Tyrii tenuere coloni. ab incolendo enim colonos uocauit, non ab agricultura. hinc et ciuitates a maioribus ciuitatibus uelut populorum examinibus conditae coloniae nuncupantur. ac per hoc cultum quidem non deberi nisi deo propria quadam notione uerbi huius omnino uerissimum est; sed quia et aliarum rerum dicitur cultus, ideo Latine uno uerbo significari cultus deo debitus non potest. nam et ipsa religio quamuis distinctius non quemlibet, sed dei cultum significare uideatur - unde isto nomine interpretati sunt nostri eam, quae Graece θρησκεία dicitur - , tamen quia Latina loquendi consuetudine, non inperitorum, uerum etiam doctissimorum, et cognationibus humanis atque adfinitatibus et quibusque necessitudinibus dicitur exhibenda religio, non eo uocabulo uitatur ambiguum, cum de cultu deitatis uertitur quaestio, ut fidenter dicere ualeamus religionem non esse nisi cultum dei, quoniam uidetur hoc uerbum a significanda obseruantia propinquitatis humanae insolenter auferri. pietas quoque proprie dei cultus intellegi solet, quam Graeci εὐσέβεια uocant. haec tamen et erga parentes officiose haberi dicitur. more autem uulgi hoc nomen etiam in operibus misericordiae frequentatur; quod ideo arbitror euenisse, quia haec fieri praecipue mandat deus eaque sibi uel pro sacrificiis uel prae sacrificiis placere testatur. ex qua loquendi consuetudine factum est, ut et deus ipse dicatur pius; quem sane Graeci nullo suo sermonis usu εὐσέβεια uocant, quamuis εὐσέβεια pro misericordia illorum etiam uulgus usurpet. unde in quibusdam scripturarum locis, ut distinctio certior appareret, non εὐσέβεια, quod ex bono cultu, sed θεοσέβεια, quod ex dei cultu conpositum resonat, dicere maluerunt. utrumlibet autem horum nos uno uerbo enuntiare non possumus. quae itaque λατρεία Graece nuncupatur et Latine interpretatur seruitus, sed ea qua colimus deum; uel quae θρησκεία Graece, Latine autem religio dicitur, sed ea quae nobis est erga deum; uel quam illi εὐσέβεια, nos uero non uno uerbo exprimere, sed dei cultum possumus appellare: hanc ei tantum deo deberi dicimus, qui uerus est deus facitque suos cultores deos. quicumque igitur sunt in caelestibus habitationibus inmortales et beati, si nos non amant nec beatos esse nos uolunt, colendi utique non sunt. si autem amant et beatos uolunt, profecto inde uolunt, unde et ipsi sunt; an aliunde ipsi beati, aliunde nos?

Übersetzung ausblenden
The City of God

Chapter 1.--That the Platonists Themselves Have Determined that God Alone Can Confer Happiness Either on Angels or Men, But that It Yet Remains a Question Whether Those Spirits Whom They Direct Us to Worship, that We May Obtain Happiness, Wish Sacrifice to Be Offered to Themselves, or to the One God Only.

It is the decided opinion of all who use their brains, that all men desire to be happy. But who are happy, or how they become so, these are questions about which the weakness of human understanding stirs endless and angry controversies, in which philosophers have wasted their strength and expended their leisure. To adduce and discuss their various opinions would be tedious, and is unnecessary. The reader may remember what we said in the eighth book, while making a selection of the philosophers with whom we might discuss the question regarding the future life of happiness, whether we can reach it by paying divine honors to the one true God, the Creator of all gods, or by worshipping many gods, and he will not expect us to repeat here the same argument, especially as, even if he has forgotten it, he may refresh his memory by reperusal. For we made selection of the Platonists, justly esteemed the noblest of the philosophers, because they had the wit to perceive that the human soul, immortal and rational, or intellectual, as it is, cannot be happy except by partaking of the light of that God by whom both itself and the world were made; and also that the happy life which all men desire cannot be reached by any who does not cleave with a pure and holy love to that one supreme good, the unchangeable God. But as even these philosophers, whether accommodating to the folly and ignorance of the people, or, as the apostle says, "becoming vain in their imaginations," ¹ supposed or allowed others to suppose that many gods should be worshipped, so that some of them considered that divine honor by worship and sacrifice should be rendered even to the demons (an error I have already exploded), we must now, by God's help, ascertain what is thought about our religious worship and piety by those immortal and blessed spirits, who dwell in the heavenly places among dominations, principalities, powers, whom the Platonists call gods, and some either good demons, or, like us, angels,--that is to say, to put it more plainly, whether the angels desire us to offer sacrifice and worship, and to consecrate our possessions and ourselves, to them or only to God, theirs and ours.

For this is the worship which is due to the Divinity, or, to speak more accurately, to the Deity; and, to express this worship in a single word as there does not occur to me any Latin term sufficiently exact, I shall avail myself, whenever necessary, of a Greek word. Latreia, whenever it occurs in Scripture, is rendered by the word service. But that service which is due to men, and in reference to which the apostle writes that servants must be subject to their own masters, ² is usually designated by another word in Greek, ³ whereas the service which is paid to God alone by worship, is always, or almost always, called latreia in the usage of those who wrote from the divine oracles. This cannot so well be called simply "cultus," for in that case it would not seem to be due exclusively to God; for the same word is applied to the respect we pay either to the memory or the living presence of men. From it, too, we derive the words agriculture, colonist, and others. ⁴ And the heathen call their gods "coelicolae," not because they worship heaven, but because they dwell in it, and as it were colonize it,--not in the sense in which we call those colonists who are attached to their native soil to cultivate it under the rule of the owners, but in the sense in which the great master of the Latin language says, "There was an ancient city inhabited by Tyrian colonists." ⁵ He called them colonists, not because they cultivated the soil, but because they inhabited the city. So, too, cities that have hived off from larger cities are called colonies. Consequently, while it is quite true that, using the word in a special sense, "cult" can be rendered to none but God, yet, as the word is applied to other things besides, the cult due to God cannot in Latin be expressed by this word alone.

The word "religion" might seem to express more definitely the worship due to God alone, and therefore Latin translators have used this word to represent threskeia; yet, as not only the uneducated, but also the best instructed, use the word religion to express human ties, and relationships, and affinities, it would inevitably introduce ambiguity to use this word in discussing the worship of God, unable as we are to say that religion is nothing else than the worship of God, without contradicting the common usage which applies this word to the observance of social relationships. "Piety," again, or, as the Greeks say, eusebeia, is commonly understood as the proper designation of the worship of God. Yet this word also is used of dutifulness to parents. The common people, too, use it of works of charity, which, I suppose, arises from the circumstance that God enjoins the performance of such works, and declares that He is pleased with them instead of, or in preference to sacrifices. From this usage it has also come to pass that God Himself is called pious, ⁶ in which sense the Greeks never use eusebein, though eusebeia is applied to works of charity by their common people also. In some passages of Scripture, therefore, they have sought to preserve the distinction by using not eusebeia, the more general word, but theosebeia, which literally denotes the worship of God. We, on the other hand, cannot express either of these ideas by one word. This worship, then, which in Greek is called latreia, and in Latin "servitus" [service], but the service due to God only; this worship, which in Greek is called threskeia, and in Latin "religio," but the religion by which we are bound to God only; this worship, which they call theosebeia, but which we cannot express in one word, but call it the worship of God,--this, we say, belongs only to that God who is the true God, and who makes His worshippers gods. ⁷ And therefore, whoever these immortal and blessed inhabitants of heaven be, if they do not love us, and wish us to be blessed, then we ought not to worship them; and if they do love us and desire our happiness, they cannot wish us to be made happy by any other means than they themselves have enjoyed,--for how could they wish our blessedness to flow from one source, theirs from another?