Traduction Masquer
Reply to Faustus the Manichaean

2.

Augustin replied: As I said a little ago, when these men are beset by clear testimonies of Scripture, and cannot escape from their grasp, they declare that the passage is spurious. The declaration only shows their aversion to the truth, and their obstinacy in error. Unable to answer these statements of Scripture, they deny their genuineness. But if this answer is admitted, or allowed to have any weight, it will be useless to quote any book or any passage against your errors. It is one thing to reject the books themselves, and to profess no regard for their authority, as the Pagans reject our Scriptures, and the Jews the New Testament, and as we reject any books peculiar to your sect, or any other heretical sect, and also the apocryphal books, which are so called, not because of any mysterious regard paid to them, but because they are mysterious in their origin, and in the absence of clear evidence, have only some obscure presumption to rest upon; and it is another thing to say, This holy man wrote only the truth, and this is his epistle, but some verses are his, and some are not. And then, when you are asked for a proof, instead of referring to more correct or more ancient manuscripts, or to a greater number, or to the original text, your reply is, This verse is his, because it makes for me; and this is not his, because it is against me. Are you, then, the rule of truth? Can nothing be true that is against you? But what answer could you give to an opponent as insane as yourself, if he confronts you by saying, The passage in your favor is spurious, and that against you is genuine? Perhaps you will produce a book, all of which can be explained so as to support you. Then, instead of rejecting a passage, he will reply by condemning the whole book as spurious. You have no resource against such an opponent. For all the testimony you can bring in favor of your book from antiquity or tradition will avail nothing. In this respect the testimony of the Catholic Church is conspicuous, as supported by a succession of bishops from the original seats of the apostles up to the present time, and by the consent of so many nations. Accordingly, should there be a question about the text of some passage, as there are a few passages with various readings well known to students of the sacred Scriptures, we should first consult the manuscripts of the country where the religion was first taught; and if these still varied, we should take the text of the greater number, or of the more ancient. And if any uncertainty remained, we should consult the original text. This is the method employed by those who, in any question about the Scriptures, do not lose sight of the regard due to their authority, and inquire with the view of gaining information, not of raising disputes. ¹

Edition Masquer
Contra Faustum Manichaeum libri triginta tres

2.

Augustinus respondit: Hoc est, quod paulo ante dixi, quia ubi sic manifesta veritate isti praefocantur, ut obsessi dilucidis verbis sanctarum scripturarum exitum in eis fallaciae suae reperire non possint, id testimonium, quod prolatum est, falsum esse respondent. O vocem a veritate fugacem, in amentia pertinacem! Usque adeo invicta sunt, quae adversus vos de divinis codicibus proferuntur, ut non sit aliud, quod dicatis nisi eos esse falsatos. p. 314,18 Quae auctoritas litterarum aperiri, qui sacer liber evolvi, quod documentum cuiuslibet scripturae ad convincendos errores exseri potest, si haec vox admittitur, si alicuius ponderis aestimatur? Aliud est ipsos libros non accipere et nullo eorum vinculo detineri, quod pagani de omnibus libris nostris, quod Iudaei de novo testamento faciunt, quod denique nos ipsi de vestris et aliorum haereticorum, si quos suos et proprios habent, vel de his, qui appellantur apocryphi – non quod habendi sint in aliqua auctoritate secreta, sed quia nulla testificationis luce declarati de nescio quo secreto nescio quorum praesumptione prolati sunt -: aliud est ergo auctoritate aliquorum vel librorum vel hominum non teneri et aliud est dicere: iste quidem vir sanctus omnia vera scripsit et ista epistula ipsius est, sed in ea ipsa hoc eius est, hoc non est eius, p. 315,6 ubi cum ex adverso audieris proba!, non confugias ad exemplaria veriora vel plurium codicum vel antiquorum vel linguae praecedentis, unde hoc in aliam linguam interpretatum est, sed dicas: inde probo hoc illius esse, illud non esse, quia hoc pro me sonat, illud contra me. Tu es ergo regula veritatis? Quicquid contra te fuerit, non est verum? Quid, si alius simili insania, sed tamen qua tua duritia confringatur, exsistat et dicat: Immo illud, quod pro te sonat, falsum est, hoc autem, quod contra te est, verum est: quid acturus es, nisi forte alium librum prolaturus, ubi quicquid legeris, secundum tuam sententiam possit intellegi? p. 315,17 Hoc si feceris, non de aliqua eius particula, sed de toto audies contradicentem et clamantem: falsus est! Quid ages? Quo te convertes? Quam libri a te prolati originem, quam vetustatem, quam seriem successionis testem citabis? Nam si hoc facere conaberis, et nihil valebis et videbis in hac re, quid ecclesiae catholicae valeat auctoritas, quae ab ipsis fundatissimis sedibus apostolorum usque ad hodiernum diem succedentium sibimet episcoporum serie et tot populorum consensione firmatur. Itaque si de fide exemplarium quaestio verteretur, sicut in nonnullis, quae et paucae sunt et sacrarum litterarum studiosis notissimae sententiarum varietates, vel ex aliarum regionum codicibus, unde ipsa doctrina commeavit, nostra dubitatio diiudicaretur, vel si ibi quoque codices variarent, plures paucioribus aut vetustiores recentioribus praeferrentur; p. 316,4 et si adhuc esset incerta varietas, praecedens lingua, unde illud interpretatum est, consuleretur. Hoc modo quaerunt, qui, quod eos movet in scripturis sanctis tanta auctoritate firmatis, invenire volunt, ut habeant, unde instruantur, non unde rixentur.