📜 Verbum
Scripture and the Fathers, read aloud in the original

← All books · Latin Fathers › Sermons & Letters

Pope Leo the Great

Sermons & Letters 202

Latin original · 29 verses · some words can be tapped for a gloss

← ch. 201ch. 203 →
202:1
1. Post inductam in Africa Manichaicam luem, ita brevi ejus error latius propagari cœpit ut in omni hominum cœtu, viri et mulieres multæ reperirentur quæ eadem turpissime polluebantur. Cum itaque id non sine magno civilis et catholicæ reipublicæ contumelia, dedecore et exitio eveniret, quia Manichaici mores et instituta primo omnia conjugiorum jura dissolvebant, protium puritatem turpissimis promiscuisque impudicitiis labefactabant, sanctioris vitæ et instituti virgines tenellam adhuc ætatem agentes corrumpebant, et perinde quasi hojus sectæ viri nullis prorsus divinis et humanis legibus subjicerentur, natura ipsa abhorrente, in omnia nequissima flagitiorum genera sese effundebant;
1. After the Manichaean plague had been introduced into Africa, its error soon began to spread more widely, so that in every gathering of men there were found men, and many women, who were most basely defiled with the same. Since therefore this came to pass not without great disgrace, dishonour, and ruin to the civil and Catholic commonwealth — because the Manichaean morals and institutions first dissolved all the rights of marriage, undermined the purity of virtue with the basest and most promiscuous acts of unchastity, corrupted virgins dedicated to a holier life and rule while still of most tender age, and, just as if the men of this sect were subject to no divine and human laws at all, poured themselves out, with nature itself recoiling, into every kind of most wicked outrage;
一、摩尼教的瘟疫傳入非洲之後,其謬誤不久便開始更廣泛地蔓延,以致在人們的每一聚集中,都能發現有男子、以及許多婦女,被同一謬誤極其卑污地玷染。因此,既然這事的發生對公民的與大公的國家帶來莫大的恥辱、羞辱與毀滅——因為摩尼教的道德與制度首先便解除了婚姻的一切權利,以最卑污、最混雜的淫行敗壞了貞德的純潔,敗壞了那些獻身於更聖潔生活與規範、卻仍在極稚嫩之齡的童貞女,並且,彷彿這教派的男子根本不受任何屬神與屬人律法的約束一般,在本性自身為之戰慄之下,縱情於各樣最邪惡的醜行;
202:2
igitur statim ac sæculi principibus innotuit isthæc Manichæorum diu arcana, et latens vivendi ratio, jam in eos eorumque sacrilegos conventus animadverteretur edictum est, latis hac de causa variis legibus, quibus multa pœnarum genera subire astringebantur. Noster animus præterea maxime horreret ea referre quæ Manichæorum electi, in cibis quibus cumque, et venerabili etiam eucharistiæ Sacramento sumendo, sacrilege et superstitiose 131 facere cogebantur. Sed nostrum animi horrorem verecundiamque, Augustidi verba, quæ subjicimus, elevabunt.
therefore, as soon as this long-hidden and secret manner of living of the Manichaeans became known to the princes of the age, punishment was at once meted out against them and their sacrilegious assemblies, and various laws were passed on this account, by which they were bound to undergo many kinds of penalties. Our mind, moreover, would utterly shudder to relate the things which the Elect of the Manichaeans were compelled to do sacrilegiously and superstitiously — in whatever foods, and in receiving even the venerable Sacrament of the Eucharist. But the words of Augustine, which we subjoin, will relieve the shudder and shame of our mind.
因此,一俟摩尼教徒這種久藏隱祕的生活方式為當世君王所知,便立即對他們及其褻瀆的聚會予以懲處,並為此頒布了各樣律法,據此他們被迫承受多種刑罰。此外,我們的心一想到摩尼教「選民」在食用各樣食物、乃至領受可敬的聖體聖事之時,被迫褻瀆而迷信地所行之事,便要全然戰慄。但我們下面所附奧古斯丁之言,將減輕我們心中的戰慄與羞愧。
202:3
Qua occasione (ait) vel potius exsecrabilis superstitionis quadam necessitate coguntur electi eorum velut encharistiam conspersam semine humano sumere, ut etiam inde, sicut de aliis cibis quos accipiunt, substantia illa divina purgetur. Neque minus impia sacrilegaque erant nonnulla alia mysteria, quæ cum magno nostrorum rituum abusu Manichicos servasse Augustinus alibi asseverat. Cum videlicet in magnum catholicæ nostræ religionis dedevus et contemptum, ipsi hujus sectæ auditores ante electos genua figebant, ut cid manus supplicibus imponerentur, non a solis presbyteris, vel episcopis, aut diaconibus eorum, sed a quibust. bet electis.
"On which occasion (he says), or rather by a certain necessity of an execrable superstition, their Elect are compelled to take, as it were, a eucharist sprinkled with human seed, so that from it also, as from the other foods which they receive, that divine substance may be purged." No less impious and sacrilegious were certain other mysteries, which Augustine elsewhere affirms the Manichaeans observed with a great abuse of our rites. For, to the great disgrace and contempt of our Catholic religion, the very Hearers of this sect bent their knees before the Elect, that hands might be laid upon them as suppliants — not by the presbyters alone, or the bishops, or their deacons, but by any of the Elect whatsoever.
「在那場合(他說),或更確切地說,出於某種可憎迷信之必然,他們的『選民』被迫領受一種彷彿撒了人類精液的聖體,以便那屬神的實體,如同從他們所領受的其他食物中一般,亦從此物中被淨化出來。」同樣不虔、褻瀆的還有若干其他的奧祕,奧古斯丁在別處斷言:摩尼教徒濫用我們的禮儀而遵守這些奧祕。因為,對我們大公宗教造成莫大的羞辱與蔑視,這教派的「聽徒」本身竟在「選民」面前屈膝下跪,好使人按手於他們如同祈求者一般——而按手者並非只有他們的長老、主教或執事,乃是任何一位「選民」皆可。
202:4
En ergo unde primum nefaria illa opinio prodierit obtinueritque, posse laicos homines sacros Ecclesie ministros instituere et ordinare; qui error jam diu obolitus, iterum elapsis sæculis uno Calvino cætersque scelestissimis auctoribus, cum totius acclesiasticæ hierarchiæ jactura, renovatus est. Cum hæc itaque et id genus alia electorum Manichaorum scelestissima secta facere consuevisset, ad hujus corruptissimos mores penitus exstirpandos sæculi principes omnem operam insumpsere. Neque vero id ex uno aut altero Leonis Magni testimonio nobis innotescit.
Behold, then, whence that nefarious opinion first arose and prevailed, that laymen can institute and ordain the sacred ministers of the Church — an error long since abolished, yet in later ages, with Calvin alone and the rest of most wicked authors, renewed to the ruin of the whole ecclesiastical hierarchy. Since therefore the most wicked sect of the Manichaean Elect had been accustomed to do these and other things of the sort, the princes of the age spent every effort to root out utterly their most corrupt morals. Nor indeed does this become known to us from one or another testimony of Leo the Great alone.
看哪,那可憎的謬見便由此首先產生並得勢,即:俗人能設立並按立教會的神聖職事者——此一謬誤久已廢除,然而在後世,卻獨獨隨加爾文及其餘最邪惡的鼓吹者,以致整個教會聖統遭受損害而重新興起。因此,既然摩尼教「選民」這一最邪惡的教派慣行這些及其類的其他事,當世的君王便竭盡全力,要徹底剷除他們最敗壞的道德。而且,這事並非僅從利奧大教宗這樣或那樣的一兩處見證為我們所知。
202:5
Sed ex ipso Theodosiano codice, in quo plures ab imperatoribus latæ in Manichiorum exitium leges describuntur, ut oportuniori alio loco observabimus. Interim vero ad eam legem opus est animadvertamus, quam, instante Juliano Africæ proconsule, duo imperatores Dioclectianus et Maximianus ediderunt, ut etiam Tillemontius commemorat. 2. Ambo itaque imperatores, anno Chrisri Domini 290, auditis primum ipsius Juliani Africæ proconsulis querimoniis, quemadmodum nova hominum secta Persarum finibus ibi adveniens, magnas intra illus regni urbes turbas exitaverat, quibus Romani imperii res susquedeque vertebantur;
But from the Theodosian Code itself, in which are described several laws passed by the emperors for the destruction of the Manichaeans, as we shall observe in another more suitable place. Meanwhile, however, it is needful that we take note of that law which, at the instance of Julian, proconsul of Africa, the two emperors Diocletian and Maximian issued, as Tillemont also records. 2. Both emperors, therefore, in the year of Christ the Lord 290, having first heard the complaints of the same Julian, proconsul of Africa, as to how a new sect of men, coming thither from the borders of the Persians, had stirred up great disturbances within the cities of that realm, by which the affairs of the Roman empire were turned upside down;
而是從《狄奧多西法典》本身——其中記載了皇帝們為毀滅摩尼教徒所頒布的若干律法,此點我們將在另一更合適之處加以論及。與此同時,我們卻須留意這樣一條律法:即在非洲總督尤利安的敦促下,兩位皇帝戴克里先與馬克西米安所頒布者,正如提耶蒙亦有記載。二、於是,兩位皇帝在基督救主紀元二百九十年,先聽了同一位非洲總督尤利安的申訴——即一群新的人的教派,如何自波斯人的邊境來到那裡,在那王國的各大城中掀起巨大的騷亂,藉此使羅馬帝國的事務天翻地覆;
202:6
ipsi, hisce malis ibi gliscentibus occurrere cupientes, in mense Martio ejusdem anni apud Alexandriam eam legem ediderunt, ut hujus sectæ homines cum nefandis eorum scripturis igne comburendi traderentur. Nobiles vero, si qui hac labe vitiati reperiebantur, præter honorum omnium jacturam in exislium deportari jusserunt; cæteros tandem infimæ conditionis viros ad capitalem subeundam pœnam coegerunt. Ejusmodi igitur legem in Africa adhuc Augustini ævo obtiuisse, inter cæteros unus Tillemontius probabilius arbitratur.
they themselves, desiring to meet these evils as they there grew rife, in the month of March of that same year issued at Alexandria that law, that the men of this sect, together with their nefarious writings, should be handed over to be burned with fire. But the nobles, if any were found tainted with this stain, they ordered to be deported into exile, besides the loss of all their honours; the rest, finally, men of the lowest condition, they compelled to undergo capital punishment. That a law of this sort still prevailed in Africa in Augustine's day, Tillemont among others judges more probable.
他們自己既欲對付那裡日益猖獗的這些禍患,便於同年三月在亞歷山大城頒布了那條律法:即這教派的人,連同他們可憎的著作,應被交付以火焚燒。至於貴族,若有人被查出染有此污點,則除了喪失一切榮銜之外,還下令流放;其餘身分最卑微之人,最終則強令受死刑。此類律法在奧古斯丁的時代仍通行於非洲——提耶蒙在眾人之中認為此說較為可信。
202:7
Qui, scite et diligenter consultis contra Felicem Augustini Actis, animadvertit hæreticum illum hominem, et episcopatis (ut aiebat) perterritum auctoritate fuisse, et illarum legum districtione, quas in nefariæ hujus sectæ exitium imperatores pervulgarunt. Sed utrumque istius hominis effugium mire eludere nisus est idem Augustinus. Primo ostendens sacrorum episcoporum auctoritatem a Deo derivatam, nullum reis timorem incutere, quando tranquille disputatur, et populus qui disputationibus edest nullam prorsus vim terroremque incutiat.
He, having skilfully and diligently consulted the Acts of Augustine against Felix, observed that that heretical man had been terrified (as he said) both by the authority of the episcopate and by the strictness of those laws which the emperors had promulgated for the destruction of this nefarious sect. But Augustine himself strove marvellously to elude both evasions of this man. First, by showing that the authority of the sacred bishops, derived from God, strikes no fear into the accused, when the disputation proceeds tranquilly, and the people who are present at the disputations inflict no force or terror at all.
此人既巧妙而勤勉地查閱了奧古斯丁駁斥斐利克斯的《行傳》,便察覺:那名異端之人(如他所說)既為主教職權的權威所懾,又為皇帝們為毀滅這可憎教派所頒布之律法的嚴厲所懾。但奧古斯丁本人卻竭力奇妙地破解此人的這兩種托辭。其一,藉指出:神聖主教之權威乃源自天主,當論辯平和進行、而在場旁聽論辯的眾人絲毫不施加暴力與恐嚇之時,此權威並不使被告心生任何懼怕。
202:8
Secundo deinde exponit, quemadmodum imperiatium legum rigor a gladii jure ortud, religionis veritati sinceræque hujus confessioni numquam obesse possit, sed utrumque semper catholicæ Ecclesiæ sacrisque ejus dogmatibus, ornamentum, præsidium atque incrementum præbuisse. Dixisti etiam quod te episcopalis terreat auctoritas: cum videas quanta pace inter nos agamus, quantu tranquillitute disputemus, quemadmodum populus præsens nullam tibi vim faciat, nullum terrorem incutiat, sed tranquillissimus audiat, sicut decet Christianos, Dixisti etiam tunere te leges imperratorum: hoc pro vera Fide non timeret, quem Spiritus sanctus impleret.
Secondly, then, he sets forth how the rigour of the imperial laws, arising from the right of the sword, can never be a hindrance to the truth of religion and to the sincere confession of it, but that both have always afforded ornament, protection, and increase to the Catholic Church and to her sacred doctrines. "You said also that the episcopal authority terrifies you: though you see with how great peace we act among ourselves, with what tranquillity we dispute, how the people present offer you no force, strike no terror, but listen most tranquilly, as befits Christians. You said also that you fear the laws of the emperors: he would not fear this for the true Faith, whom the Holy Spirit should fill."
其二,他繼而闡明:源自刀劍之權的帝國律法之嚴厲,斷不能妨礙宗教之真理與對真理誠摯的宣認,反倒二者始終為大公教會及其神聖教義帶來裝飾、保障與增長。「你又說主教的權威使你恐懼:你既看見我們彼此間何等和睦地行事,何等平和地論辯,在場的眾人如何絲毫不對你施加暴力、不加以任何恐嚇,反倒如基督徒所當為的那樣、最為平和地聆聽。你又說你懼怕皇帝的律法:凡被聖靈充滿之人,必不為真信德而懼怕這些律法。」
202:9
Cujus quidem rei causa eadem Petri apostoli exemplum proponit, qui divino 132 actus Spiritu pro Dominica fide crucifixius est. Verum Felix ipse nimio contentionis studio adductus, ita respondere Augustino ausus est: Et apostoli timuerunt. Quod novum Felicis Manichæi effugium idem sanctus Pater eripere cupiens, quemadmodum apostoli tyrannos timuissent statim hisce verbis explicavit. Timuerun (ait) ut caverent, non ut fidem suam comprehensi edicere dubitarent. Et paulo infra, leviter et sine ulla verborum ambiguitate aut contumelia eum objurgat quod imperatorem antea non timuerit, ut comminiscebatur, quia antea non tacuit: Nam etsi imperatorem timuisses, ante tacuisses.
For which very reason he proposes the same example of the apostle Peter, who, moved by the divine Spirit, was crucified for the Lord's faith. But Felix himself, led by too great a zeal for contention, dared to answer Augustine thus: "The apostles too were afraid." This new evasion of Felix the Manichaean the same holy Father, desiring to snatch away, at once explained in these words how the apostles feared tyrants. "They feared" (he says) "in order to take precaution, not so as to hesitate, when apprehended, to declare their faith." And a little below, lightly and without any ambiguity of words or insult, he rebukes him for not having earlier feared the emperor, as he pretended, since he had not earlier kept silent: "For if you had feared the emperor, you would earlier have kept silent."
正因此故,他便舉出同一位使徒彼得的榜樣——彼得受神聖之靈的感動,為主的信仰被釘十字架。但斐利克斯本人因過度熱衷爭辯,竟敢如此回答奧古斯丁:「使徒們也曾害怕。」斐利克斯這摩尼教徒的這一新托辭,這位聖教父欲加以剝奪,便立即以這些話說明使徒們如何懼怕暴君。「他們懼怕(他說)是為了防備,而非在被捕之時遲疑不敢宣認自己的信仰。」再往下一點,他輕描淡寫、毫無言語含糊或侮辱地責備斐利克斯:他既先前並未緘默,便不曾如他所偽稱的那樣先前懼怕皇帝:「因為你若曾懼怕皇帝,你早該先前緘默了。」
202:10
Et cum hesterna die in Manichæismi suspicionem Felix fuisser adductus, ad urbis Hippone curatorem provocavit, cui libello exhibito publice elamitaverat se juxta Diocletianam legem, cum suis eodicibus esse paratum incendi, si aliquid mali in ipsis fuerit inventum, ideireo, quasi eum irridens sic Augustinus suam claudit responsionem. Unde heri leges flagitabas quasi fortis, hodie veritatem fugis ut timidus. 3. Ex his ergo publicis Augustini episcopi cum Felice Manichæo Actis, luce clarius ille imperialium legum rigor emicat, quo in Africa istius sectæ homines afficiebantur, cum videlicet ejusmodi hæreseus professors suis cum condicibus igne comburendi tradebantur.
And when, on the previous day, Felix had been brought under suspicion of Manichaeism, he appealed to the curator of the city of Hippo, to whom, having presented a petition, he had publicly clamoured that he, according to the Diocletian law, was ready to be burned together with his codices, if anything evil should be found in them; therefore, as though mocking him, Augustine thus closes his response: "Whence yesterday you demanded the laws as though brave, today you flee the truth as though timid." 3. From these public Acts, then, of Augustine the bishop with Felix the Manichaean, that rigour of the imperial laws shines forth clearer than light, by which the men of that sect in Africa were afflicted, since, namely, the professors of that heresy of this sort were handed over with their codices to be burned with fire.
而當斐利克斯在前一日被置於摩尼教之嫌疑下時,他訴諸希波城的市政官;他向市政官呈上一份陳情書,公開喧嚷說:他依戴克里先的律法,甘願與其抄本一同被焚——若在其中查出任何邪惡之物的話;因此,奧古斯丁彷彿譏諷他一般,如此結束其回應:「你昨日彷彿勇者般索求律法,今日卻彷彿懦夫般逃避真理。」三、於是,從奧古斯丁主教與斐利克斯這摩尼教徒的這些公開《行傳》中,帝國律法的那種嚴厲便比光更清楚地顯明出來——非洲那教派的人便為此律法所懲治,即是說,這類異端的鼓吹者便連同其抄本被交付以火焚燒。
202:11
Liquet præterea episcoporum auctoritas non tantum in perstringendis hominibus ea labe infectis, ut errores ejurarent, sed ad penitus exstirpandas ex eorum diœcesibus quascumque novitates, quæ catholicæ religioni repugnabant; quæ sane episcopalis ecclesiastica auctoritas maxime enituit in hac Felicis causa. Qui cum anno 404, Honorio Augusto sextum consule die sexta Decembris, temere et palam in Hipponensium urbe dixisset quod posset defendere scripturas Manichæi, et asserere quod veritatem habeant;
It is moreover clear that the authority of the bishops availed not only in pressing hard the men infected with that stain, so that they might abjure their errors, but also in utterly rooting out from their dioceses whatever novelties were repugnant to the Catholic religion; which episcopal, ecclesiastical authority indeed shone forth greatly in this case of Felix. Who, when in the year 404, Honorius Augustus being consul for the sixth time, on the sixth day of December, had rashly and openly said in the city of the people of Hippo that he could defend the writings of Manichaeus, and assert that they held the truth;
此外,顯然的是:眾主教的權威不僅在逼迫那些染有此污點之人棄絕其謬誤上有效,而且在從其教區中徹底剷除凡與大公宗教相牴觸的一切新奇之說上亦然;而這種主教的、教會的權威,確實在斐利克斯此案中大放異彩。斐利克斯於四百零四年、即霍諾里烏斯皇帝第六次執政、十二月六日,在希波人民的城中,輕率而公然地說:他能為摩尼的著作辯護,並斷言那些著作持有真理;
202:12
atque præterea, eadem de causa cum merito apud urbis curatorem, ut vidimus, tum apud Augustinum episcopum tamquam exscerabilis blasphemiæ reus postulatus fuisset, jamjam publicam subire quæsitionem cogebatur. Nec enim Felix Hipponem inhabitabat, sed ibi venerat Manichaicos errores seminaturus. Qui cum esset unus ex doctioribus eorum, liberalibus tamen ineruditus litteris, sed versutior Fortunato, latius errores propagari confedentius sperabat. Addit Possidius ex eorum numero fuisse quos electos dicunt; quique, præter nefaria dogmata quæ propugnabant, impurissimis impudicitiis et obscenitatibus addicebantur.
and moreover, for the same cause having been rightly arraigned both before the curator of the city, as we have seen, and before Augustine the bishop as one guilty of execrable blasphemy, he was now being compelled to undergo a public inquiry. For Felix did not dwell at Hippo, but had come there to sow the Manichaean errors. Since he was one of the more learned among them, yet uninstructed in liberal letters, but craftier than Fortunatus, he hoped more confidently to propagate the errors more widely. Possidius adds that he was of the number of those whom they call the Elect; who, besides the nefarious doctrines they championed, were addicted to the most impure acts of unchastity and obscenities.
此外,斐利克斯既因同一緣故,如我們所見,既在城的市政官面前、又在奧古斯丁主教面前,被正當地控以可憎褻瀆之罪,如今便被迫接受一場公開的審問。因為斐利克斯並不居於希波,乃是到那裡來散播摩尼教的謬誤。既然他是他們中較有學問者之一,卻未受博雅之學的教育,但比福爾圖納圖斯更為狡詐,他便更有把握地盼望更廣泛地傳播謬誤。波西迪烏斯又補充說:他屬於他們所稱「選民」之列;這些人除了所鼓吹的可憎教義之外,還沉溺於最不潔的淫行與穢事。
202:13
Congressio isthæc igitur die sequenti, id est septima Decembris, populo præsente, in ecclesia, cœpta est. Quam congressionem gesta ecclesiastica, seujudicium ecclesiasticum, a notariis quidem scripto consignatum, Augustinus appellat, quondam inter disputandum ab illa Manichæi epistola, quam fundamentum appellant, orsi sunt: sed non eadem die congressio hæc aut episcopalia Acta fuere absoluta. Nam Felix cum veritate urgeretur, et Augustini argumentis maxime | erstringeretur, dixit: Dilationem peto, ut possim respondere.
This engagement, therefore, on the following day — that is, the seventh of December — was begun in the church, with the people present. This engagement Augustine calls ecclesiastical proceedings, or an ecclesiastical judgment, set down indeed in writing by notaries; they began, in the course of disputing, from that letter of Manichaeus which they call the Fundamentum: but this engagement, or the episcopal Acts, were not completed on the same day. For Felix, when he was pressed by the truth, and was most hard-pressed by Augustine's arguments, said: "I ask for a postponement, that I may be able to answer."
因此,這場交鋒便於次日、即十二月七日,在眾民在場之下、在教堂中展開。這場交鋒,奧古斯丁稱之為教會的訴訟程序、或教會的審判,確實由書記員以文字記錄下來;他們在論辯之際,從摩尼那封他們稱為《根基》的書信著手:但這場交鋒、或主教的《行傳》,並未在同一日內結束。因為斐利克斯被真理所逼、又極其被奧古斯丁的論證所窘困之時,便說:「我請求延期,以便我能作答。」
202:14
Cujus quippe votis benigne atque perhumaniter annuens Augustinus, quem admodum catholicæ Ecclesiæ episcopum decebat, reliqua disputationis Acta dierum quinque spatio prolata sunt, hoc est ad diem pridie idus Decembris. 4. Ejusmodi disputationis prolatationem, quamvis Augustinus humanius cum Felice agere cupiens illi indulsisset, S. episcopi tamen animus a timore vacnus, et liber non erat, Felicem secum reputasse fugam arripere, ut nimirum pœnas evaderet borum facinorum reis intentatas. Quare antequam ad finempriorem hanc perduceret collationem, multa cautione uti illi oppus fuit. Sciscitari videlicet ex eo am fugam mediatur.
To whose wish Augustine, benignly and most courteously assenting, as befitted a bishop of the Catholic Church, the remaining Acts of the disputation were extended over the space of five days — that is, to the day before the Ides of December. 4. Although Augustine, wishing to deal more humanely with Felix, had granted such a postponement of the disputation, nevertheless the mind of the holy bishop was not void of, nor free from, fear that Felix had reckoned within himself to take to flight, that he might, namely, escape the penalties threatened against those guilty of these crimes. Wherefore, before he brought this earlier conference to its end, he had need to use much caution — namely, to inquire of him whether he was contemplating flight.
奧古斯丁既仁慈而極為謙和地應允了他的請求,一如大公教會的主教所當為的那樣,論辯其餘的《行傳》便延展至五日之久——即延至十二月十三日(望日前一日)。四、儘管奧古斯丁欲以更寬厚之道對待斐利克斯而准予論辯如此延期,然而這位聖主教的心卻並非毫無、亦非全然擺脫這樣的憂懼:斐利克斯心中已盤算要逃跑,好使他得以逃脫那些威嚇這類罪犯的刑罰。因此,在他結束這前一場會談之前,他須採取諸多謹慎——即向他查問:他是否正圖謀逃跑。
202:15
Quod ille cum semel iterumque negasset, ei proponitur anathema dicere Manichæo, 133 atque se sub alicujus hominis custodia consti- tuere. Quibus in omnibus cum Felix fidem publice datam dervasset, et primæ disputationis gesta signata fuissent, cum a Felice et Augustino, tum a quodam Bonifacio sub cujus custodia Felicem se commisisse arbitramur, jam priora Acta magna cum catholicæ veritatis gloria ad exitum perducta fuere. Quid vero quinque diebus elapsis factum fueri, Acta similiter cum Felice Manichæo secundæ dici perspicue produnt.
When Felix had denied this once and again, it is proposed to him to pronounce anathema against Manichaeus, and to place himself under the custody of some man. In all which, since Felix kept the faith publicly given, and the proceedings of the first disputation had been signed both by Felix and by Augustine, and also by a certain Bonifacius under whose custody we suppose Felix committed himself, the earlier Acts were now brought to their end with great glory to the Catholic truth. But what was done after the five days had elapsed, the Acts of the second day likewise, with Felix the Manichaean, plainly reveal.
當斐利克斯一再否認此事之後,便向他提議:對摩尼宣布逐出教會之咒詛,並將自己置於某人的看管之下。在這一切之中,既然斐利克斯守住了他公開所立的承諾,而第一場論辯的紀錄既由斐利克斯與奧古斯丁二人、又由某位波尼法修(我們推想斐利克斯是託身於其看管之下)簽署,那前面的《行傳》便以大公真理的莫大榮耀圓滿收場了。至於五日過後所發生之事,同樣地,與斐利克斯這摩尼教徒有關的第二日《行傳》清楚地予以揭示。
202:16
Etinim covenientibus iis cum frequenti populo, et notariis in Ecclesia pacis die duodecima ejusdem mensis, ab iis rebus, sive dogmatibus, Agustinus orsus est novam disputationem, a quibus præcedens finem obtinuerat. Si Deo (aiebat Augustinus) nocere nihil poterat, quare bellum ge sit cum gente quam dicitis tenebrarum, in quo bello naturæ dœmonum misce- ret substantiam suam, quæ hoc est quod ipse, sicut jam interrogatus dixisti? Ita sane Felicem S. episopus aggrediebatur.
For when they had assembled, together with a large crowd of people and the notaries, in the Church of Peace on the twelfth day of the same month, Augustine began a new disputation from those matters, or doctrines, at which the preceding one had reached its end. "If nothing could harm God (Augustine was saying), why did he wage war with the race which you call that of darkness, in which war he mingled the substance of nature with the demons — which is what you yourself, as you said when questioned, hold?" Thus indeed the holy bishop pressed Felix.
因為當他們於同月十二日,連同一大群百姓與書記員,聚集於「和平堂」之時,奧古斯丁便從前一場論辯所終止之處的那些事、或教義,展開一場新的論辯。「倘若沒有任何東西能傷害天主(奧古斯丁說道),那麼祂為何要與你們所稱為『黑暗』的那族類爭戰呢?在那場戰爭中,祂竟將本性的實體與眾魔混雜——這正是你自己受問時所說、所持守的觀點?」聖主教便如此逼問斐利克斯。
202:17
Cui quidem fabuloso figmento eum hæreticus homo occurret, versulia et lergiversatione simul utens, se adhuc esse imparatum respondit, nullam inter manus eo otii tempore scripturam babuisse, quia illi redditæ non fuerant, unde se posset instruere. Nullus enim (subjiciebat) ad certamen exit nisi prius munitus fuerit; et nullus litigator potest sine suis chartis litigare, similiter et ego sine mea scriptura respondere non possum, Hac arte itaque novum periculum evadere Felix nitebatur. Sed Augustinus novit; et apprime quidem versuti hominis tergiversationem novit.
To which fabulous fiction the heretical man met him, using at once craft and evasion, answering that he was still unprepared, that he had had no writing in his hands during that time of leisure, because they had not been returned to him, whence he might instruct himself. "For no one" (he added) "goes out to the contest unless first equipped; and no litigant can litigate without his documents; likewise I too cannot answer without my writing." By this artifice, therefore, Felix strove to escape the new danger. But Augustine knew it; and knew full well the tergiversation of the crafty man.
這位異端之人便以此荒誕的虛構迎向他,兼用狡詐與推諉,回答說:他仍未準備妥當,在那段閒暇之時他手中並無任何著作,因為那些著作尚未歸還於他,使他無從自我裝備。「因為(他補充說)沒有人不先武裝便上場競技;也沒有訴訟人能沒有自己的文件而興訟;同樣地,我也不能沒有我的著作而作答。」於是,斐利克斯便以此伎倆力圖逃脫這新的危險。但奧古斯丁識破了它;並且極其透徹地識破了這狡詐之人的推諉。
202:18
Proptorea gravi, et auctoritatis sermone pleno ad eum conversus, acriter hunc increpat, quod sacrilegos errores hac excusatione niteretur occulere, eumque novum facinoris reum expostulat, quod quimque dierum spatio ad respondendum petens, codices quoque sibi dari non exquisivisset, qui sub publico sigillo custodiebantur. Exoptatam igitur duorum adhuc dierum prolatationem non obtinum Felix. Sed codices dumtaxat ei dati fuere. Quos cum is accepisset, ita eum S. episcopus urgere cœpit, tantaque vi et rationum pondere eum insectari, ut excussis omnibus Manichæi fabulosis figmentis, erroribus atque impietatibus, tandem argumentorum veritate victus, cum miximo catholicorum plausu.
Therefore, turning to him with a grave discourse full of authority, he sharply rebukes him, because by this excuse he was striving to conceal his sacrilegious errors; and he charges him as guilty of a new offence, in that, while asking a space of five days to make his reply, he had not also sought that the codices be handed over to him, which were kept under a public seal. Felix, then, did not obtain the desired postponement of two further days; but the codices at least were given to him. When he had received them, the holy bishop began so to press him, and to pursue him with such force and weight of argument, that, once all the fabulous fictions, errors, and impieties of Mani had been shaken out, he was at last overcome by the truth of the arguments, amid the greatest applause of the Catholics.
因此,他以莊重且充滿權威的言辭轉向他,嚴厲地斥責他,因為他企圖藉這藉口掩飾自己褻瀆的謬誤;並且指控他犯了新的罪行,即他雖然請求五日的期限來作答辯,卻沒有一併要求把那些存放在公家印鑑之下保管的抄本交給他。於是,斐理斯(Felix)沒有得到他所渴望的再延兩日;但抄本至少交給了他。當他接過抄本後,這位聖主教便開始如此逼迫他,以如此強大的力量和論證的分量追擊他,以致當摩尼一切虛構的杜撰、謬誤與不敬都被抖落出來後,他終於被論證的真理所折服,在大公信徒的極大喝采聲中。
202:19
Manichæum ejusque doctrinam coram tam frequenti cœtu ejuraret. Interim vero, ut omnibus innotesceret, se Manichæo ejusque erroribus sincere et ex animo anathema dicturum, ab eodem Augustino episcopo anathematismorum formulam scripto consignatam exposcebat. Sed hoc maxime rogare, ut sibi Felici quo magis confirmaretur præiret Augustinus, ac Manichærum, necnon spiritum qui in eo locutus fuerat, prior annthemaret. Id tandem assecutus est. Nam accepta ab Augustino charta, anathematismo exsecravit; idem præstitit Felix verba sequential sua manu scribens: Ego Felix qui Manichæo crediderani, nunc anathemo eum et doctrinam ipsius;
He abjured Mani and his doctrine before so numerous an assembly. Meanwhile, in order that it might be made known to all that he was sincerely and from his heart pronouncing anathema upon Mani and his errors, he demanded from the same bishop Augustine a formula of the anathemas consigned to writing. But this above all he begged, that, so that he, Felix, might be the more confirmed, Augustine should go first, and should be the first to anathematize Mani, and also the spirit that had spoken in him. This at length he obtained. For, having received the paper from Augustine, he cursed him with an anathema; the same Felix did, writing the following words with his own hand: 'I, Felix, who had believed in Mani, now anathematize him and his doctrine;'
他在如此眾多的會眾面前棄絕了摩尼及其教義。與此同時,為使眾人皆知他是真誠地、發自內心地向摩尼及其謬誤宣告詛咒(anathema),他向這同一位主教奧古斯丁索取一份寫成文字的詛咒公式。但他尤其懇求的是:為使他斐理斯更加堅定,願奧古斯丁先行一步,率先詛咒摩尼,並詛咒那曾在他裏面說話的靈。這事他終於得到了。因為,他從奧古斯丁手中接過那文書後,便以詛咒咒罵了他(摩尼);斐理斯也如此做,親手寫下以下的話:「我斐理斯,曾信過摩尼,如今詛咒他和他的教義;」
202:20
et id genus alia, quæ apud Augustinum in fine secundi libri commode ab omnibus pereurri possunt. 5. Verum in his omnibus recensendis nos incassum laborasse arbitramur dicturos qui Aupustini Vitam a PP. congregationis S. Mauri concinne et erudite digestam evolverunt. Libro enim quinto, cap. 12. summatim ea omnia quæ ad præsentes Augustuni cum Felice disputationes pertinent plenius descripsere. Quid tum ? Num nobis non licebat easdem res retractare, eam imperatorum ethnicorum in Manichæos latam legem referre, quemadmodum Felix ad eam provocasset explicate, simulque ostendere hunc utriusque potestatis rigorem et pœnas pertimuisse? Hæc omnia quidem doctissimi Operum S.
and other things of the same kind, which may conveniently be perused by all in Augustine, at the end of the second book. 5. But in reviewing all these matters we think we have laboured in vain, as those will say who have unrolled the Life of Augustine, elegantly and learnedly arranged by the Fathers of the Congregation of Saint Maur. For in the fifth book, chapter 12, they have more fully described in summary all those things that pertain to the present disputations of Augustine with Felix. What then? Was it not permitted to us to treat these same matters again, to relate the law passed by the pagan emperors against the Manichaeans, to explain in what manner Felix had appealed to it, and at the same time to show that he dreaded the rigour and the penalties of both powers? All these things indeed the most learned editors of the Works of Saint
以及其他同類的話,這些話眾人都可以在奧古斯丁著作第二卷的末尾方便地讀到。5. 然而在細述這一切事情時,我們自認是白費了力氣——正如那些展讀過《奧古斯丁傳》的人所會說的,那部傳記是由聖莫爾(St. Maur)修會的神父們雅致而博學地編纂而成的。因為在第五卷第十二章中,他們已更充分地扼要描述了一切與奧古斯丁和斐理斯當前辯論有關的事情。那又如何呢?難道我們就不被允許再度論述這同樣的事情、記述異教皇帝們針對摩尼派所頒布的法律、詳細解釋斐理斯如何向此法律申訴、並同時顯明他曾懼怕政教兩種權柄的嚴厲與刑罰嗎?這一切事情,聖奧古斯丁著作那些極為博學的編者
202:21
Augustini ed tores missa facere, a proposito sibi seribendi scopo id alienum esse forte causati, quo nimirum res dumtaxat ab Augustino cum Felice gestas enarrare voluerunt. Cum igitur nostrum in conscribenda Ma- nichæorum historia studium illud potissimum spectaret, ut, servata quantum licuit temporum ratione, illius sectæ facinora, a 134 gravissimis et fide dignis scriptoribus indicata, in unum veluti corpus collecta redigeremus; idcirco, illa eadem in nostrum usum transtulimus annotationibus iis ubique apppositis, quas alii aliud negotium agentes ant prætermisrunt, aut saltem prætermittere debuerunt. 6.
Augustine passed over, perhaps pleading that it was foreign to the aim of writing set before them, namely that they wished merely to narrate the deeds transacted by Augustine with Felix. Since, therefore, our zeal in composing the history of the Manichaeans aimed chiefly at this, that, keeping as far as possible the reckoning of the times, we might collect into one body, as it were, the crimes of that sect, indicated by the gravest and most trustworthy writers; for that reason we have transferred those same things to our own use, everywhere adding those annotations which others, being engaged upon a different business, either omitted, or at any rate ought to have omitted. 6.
卻略過不提,或許藉口說這與他們所設定的寫作目標無關,也就是說他們只想敘述奧古斯丁與斐理斯之間所發生的事蹟。因此,既然我們在撰寫摩尼派歷史時所著眼的主要在於此:即在盡可能保持年代次序的前提下,把那教派的種種罪行——那些由最嚴謹、最可信的作者所指出的罪行——彷彿匯集為一個整體;為此緣故,我們便把這同樣的事情轉用於我們自己的著作,並處處加上那些註釋,那是別人因忙於另一項工作而略去了、或至少本應略去的。6.
202:22
Iuterim vero nos, ne in iis quæ ad rem nostram faciunt deficere videamur, minime silentio occulmus Augustinum inter et Felicem, non duas, sed tres habitas fuisse collationes. Id obscure saltem indicare voluit Possidius in Augustini Vita. Sed rursus clarius id ex ipsius Augutiui verbis innotescit. Qui in primæ diei collatione a notariis excepta, aliam præcedentem congressionem indicavit, ita Felicem Manichæum alloquendo: Hesterno die scit se dixisse. Atque iterum Felix ipse Augustinianis occurrens interrogationibus, se paratum probare promittit quod impie et sacrilege asseverabat, si ei darentur Manichæi scripturæ, quinque auctores (ait) quos tibi dixi, quidquid me interrogaveris probo tibi.
Meanwhile, however, lest we should seem to fall short in those things which pertain to our subject, we by no means pass over in silence that there were held between Augustine and Felix not two, but three conferences. Possidius wished to indicate this, at least obscurely, in the Life of Augustine. But again it is made known more clearly from the very words of Augustine, who, in the conference of the first day taken down by the notaries, indicated another preceding meeting, addressing Felix the Manichaean thus: 'He knows that he said yesterday.' And again Felix himself, meeting Augustine's questions, promises that he is ready to prove what he was impiously and sacrilegiously asserting, if the Manichaean scriptures were given to him: 'the five authors (he says) whom I have named to you—whatever you ask me, I prove to you.'
與此同時,為使我們在與本題相關的事上不致顯得有所欠缺,我們決不緘默地隱瞞:奧古斯丁與斐理斯之間所舉行的並非兩次,而是三次會談。波西狄烏斯(Possidius)在《奧古斯丁傳》中至少曾隱晦地想指出這一點。但這事又更清楚地從奧古斯丁本人的話中顯明出來;他在被書記記錄下來的第一天會談中,指出另有一次先前的聚會,這樣對摩尼派的斐理斯說道:「他知道自己昨天說過。」斐理斯本人再一次面對奧古斯丁的質問時,也答應說他準備好證明他不敬而褻瀆地所斷言之事,只要把摩尼派的經卷交給他:「我對你說過的那五位作者(他說),無論你問我什麼,我都向你證明。」
202:23
Cujus sane verba referenda sunt ad illos codices quos in postrema collatione etiam exposcebat, quique sub publico custodiebantur sigillo. At ejusmodi libri jam custodiendi sub sigillo traditi erant antequam collationes publicæ et solemnes a notariis scripto exciperentur. Igitur cum hæc omnia mecum reputo, facile in eam ducor opinionem, duas dumtaxat ad cancellos Ecclesiæ astante populo collationes seu disputationes S, episcopum habuisse; sed has aliam jam præivisse coram imperiali curatore, quando Felix videlicet, suo supplici libello ad imperialium legum pœnas provocavit, quando tandem apocrybus Scripturarum codices sub publico custodiendos sigillo tradidit.
His words are certainly to be referred to those codices which in the last conference he was also demanding, and which were kept under a public seal. But books of this sort had already been handed over to be kept under seal before the public and solemn conferences were taken down in writing by the notaries. Therefore, when I weigh all these things within myself, I am easily led to the opinion that the holy bishop held only two conferences or disputations at the rails of the Church, with the people standing by; but that another had already preceded these before the imperial commissioner, namely when Felix, by his written petition, appealed to the penalties of the imperial laws, and when at length he handed over the apocryphal codices of the Scriptures to be kept under a public seal.
他的這番話當然應指向那些抄本,就是他在最後一次會談中也在索取的、且存放在公家印鑑之下保管的抄本。但這類書卷早在公開而隆重的會談被書記記錄成文之前,就已被交出加封保管了。因此,當我把這一切事情在心中權衡時,我便很容易被引向這個看法:這位聖主教在教堂欄柵前、在會眾站立旁觀之下,只舉行了兩次會談或辯論;但在此之前,還有另一次已在帝國專員面前先行舉行過了,也就是說,當斐理斯藉其書面陳情向帝國法律的刑罰申訴之時,以及當他終於把偽經抄本交出、存放在公家印鑑之下保管之時。
202:24
Ita profecto eniquam ratiocinarilicebit, qui non oscitanter et Possidii testimonium, et illarum disputationum Acta sedulo lustrare voluerit. 7. Priorem hanc quæstionem illa alia excipit, quæ ad Felicis Manichæi ecclesiasticum gradum pertinere visa est. Cui quidem inquisitioni occasionem præbuit Augustini epistola 79 quam presbytero Manichæo Fortubati successori S. episcopus inscripsit. Ex ea enim Augustini Operum editoribus injectus est scrupulus, ut suspicarentur hunc eumdem presbyterum fuisse illum Felieem de quo hactenus locuti sumus. Suspicio autem isthæc, quibus innixa est momentis vel conjecturis, ne vanam omnini et falsam eam existimemus ? Unde ut ita suspi emur fundamenta hauriemus ?
Thus indeed anyone will be permitted to reason, who is willing not carelessly but diligently to survey both the testimony of Possidius and the Acts of those disputations. 7. This earlier question is followed by that other one, which seemed to pertain to the ecclesiastical rank of Felix the Manichaean. To this inquiry occasion was given by Augustine's letter 79, which the holy bishop addressed to a Manichaean presbyter, the successor of Fortunatus. For from it a scruple was cast upon the editors of Augustine's Works, so that they suspected that this same presbyter was that very Felix of whom we have hitherto been speaking. But this suspicion—on what grounds or conjectures does it rest, that we should not deem it altogether empty and false? Whence shall we draw the foundations for suspecting thus?
凡不願草率而願勤勉地審視波西狄烏斯的見證以及那些辯論記錄的人,確實都可以如此推理。7. 這較早的問題之後接續著另一個問題,它似乎與摩尼派斐理斯的教會品級有關。這項探究的緣由是奧古斯丁的第79封書信,那是這位聖主教寫給一位摩尼派長老、福圖納圖斯(Fortunatus)的繼任者的。因為從這封信中,奧古斯丁著作的編者們生出了一個疑慮,以致他們懷疑這同一位長老就是我們迄今所談論的那位斐理斯。但這懷疑——它究竟依據什麼理由或推測,使我們不至於認定它全然空洞而虛假呢?我們又要從何處汲取根據來如此懷疑呢?
202:25
Ego profecto qui nullo partium studio adducor, si quod animo revolvo sincere fateri debeam, presbyterum hunc Manichæum ad quem laudatam dedit epistolam Augustinus, alium fuisse a Felice judicabo. At ne probabilis hujus opinionis fundamenta dissimulare videar, statim ita paucis ratiocinabor. Regabo videlicet novissimos Augustini editores an epistola 79 laudatas Augustini cum Felice collationes exceperit, vel illas præiverit ? Sed iis collationibus esse posteriorem haudquaquam judicare Licet.
I, for my part, who am led by no partisan zeal, if I ought sincerely to confess what I turn over in my mind, will judge that this Manichaean presbyter, to whom Augustine sent the letter just mentioned, was another than Felix. But lest I should seem to dissemble the foundations of this probable opinion, I will at once reason thus in a few words. I will, namely, ask the most recent editors of Augustine whether letter 79 came after the aforesaid conferences of Augustine with Felix, or preceded them. But it is by no means permitted to judge that it is later than those conferences.
至於我,我不受任何黨派熱情所左右;若我理當真誠地承認我心中所思量的,我便會判定這位摩尼派長老——奧古斯丁寄那封方才提到之書信的對象——是與斐理斯不同的另一個人。但為免我顯得掩飾這個可能看法的根據,我立刻就用幾句話這樣推理。我要問一問奧古斯丁最新的編者們:第79封書信究竟是在奧古斯丁與斐理斯上述會談之後,還是在其之前?然而,斷定它晚於那些會談是絕不被允許的。
202:26
Nam Felix jam ex animo conversus, antequam novissimæ collationis Acta ad finem perducerentur, catholicam religionem jam palam confessus est, Manichæum ejusque dogmata ejuravit, nec cum in pristinos relapsum errores esse sine gravissimis testimoniis possumus existimare. Laudatam ergo 79 Augustini epistolam duas illas collationes scripto exceptas præivisse minime ejusdem editores dubitabunt. Istu sane indicare voluisse arbitramur, cum ad editorum exemplarium marginem temporis notam posuerunt: Scripta forte anno 404.
For Felix, already converted from his heart, before the Acts of the last conference were brought to a close, had already openly confessed the Catholic religion, had abjured Mani and his dogmas; nor can we, without the gravest testimonies, suppose that he relapsed into his former errors. Therefore the editors will by no means doubt that Augustine's letter 79, which we have cited, preceded those two conferences taken down in writing. This indeed we judge they meant to indicate, when at the margin of the printed copies they placed a note of time: 'Written perhaps in the year 404.'
因為斐理斯早在最後一次會談的記錄結束之前,就已經發自內心地悔改,公開承認了大公信仰,棄絕了摩尼及其教條;我們若無最嚴謹的見證,實在不能認為他重新墮回從前的謬誤。因此,編者們決不會懷疑我們所引的奧古斯丁第79封書信是在那兩次被記錄成文的會談之前寫成的。我們認為這正是他們想要指出的,因為他們在印本的頁邊上加了一個時間註記:「或許寫於404年。」
202:27
In quem quidem annum etsi, certas genuinasque consulum notas secuti, publicas Augustini cum Felice Manichæo congressiones rejiciamus, tamen cum easdem labente hoc anno habuerit, Decembris videlicet duodecima die, idcirco nemo sanæ mentis his posteriorem esse epistolam 79 poterit affirmare. Quæ tandem cum agitarem, hujus epistolæ argumentum cum iis quæ in disputationibus describuntur non indiligenter contuli; nec sibi 135 concinere deprehendi. Nam ille presbyter Manichæus, quem Felicemfuisse laudati editores suspicantur, cum quibusdam Augustini fratribus quæstionem excitaverat de visibili morte non fugienda;
Into which year indeed, even though—following the sure and genuine notes of the consuls—we assign the public meetings of Augustine with Felix the Manichaean, yet since he held these same meetings in the course of this year, namely on the twelfth day of December, therefore no one of sound mind will be able to affirm that letter 79 is later than these. When at length I was pondering these things, I not carelessly compared the argument of this letter with those things which are described in the disputations; and I found that they did not agree with one another. For that Manichaean presbyter, whom the aforesaid editors suspect to have been Felix, had raised a question with certain brethren of Augustine about a visible death that is not to be fled;
至於這一年,即使我們——遵循執政官那確定而真實的紀年——把奧古斯丁與摩尼派斐理斯的公開聚會歸於此年,然而既然他是在這一年之中、即在十二月十二日舉行這些聚會的,那麼任何神智清明的人都無法斷言第79封書信晚於這些聚會。當我終於思量這些事情時,我頗為留心地把這封信的內容與那些辯論中所描述的事情作了比較;結果發現二者彼此並不相符。因為那位摩尼派長老,即前述編者們懷疑就是斐理斯的那位,曾與奧古斯丁的某些弟兄們引發過一場爭論,論及一種不當逃避的、可見的死亡;
202:28
contendens eam non esse dumtaxat mentis a corpore separationem, sed avulsionem etiam boni a malo. Hoc cum ex Manichaico dogmate presbyter ille affirmaret, hunc Augustinus perstringere nititur, simulque eum ad disputationes publicas vocat, ut quæstionem solveret, in qua præcessor suus Fortunatus defecerat. Sed slia inesse iis disputationibus argumenta, jam ex ipsa Actorum serie innetesed. Augustinus præterea neque in Retractationum libris, neque in collationum Actis, hanc ad Felicem epistolam dedisse asseverat; atque istud idem silent um Possidium in Augustini Vita sevasse, perspicue manifestum est.
contending that it is not merely the separation of the mind from the body, but also the tearing away of good from evil. When that presbyter affirmed this from the Manichaean dogma, Augustine strives to refute him, and at the same time calls him to public disputations, in order that he might resolve the question in which his predecessor Fortunatus had failed. But that there were other arguments contained in those disputations is already made evident from the very series of the Acts. Moreover, Augustine, neither in the books of the Retractations, nor in the Acts of the conferences, asserts that he sent this letter to Felix; and it is perfectly manifest that Possidius preserved this same silence in the Life of Augustine.
他主張這死亡不僅是心智與身體的分離,更是善與惡的撕裂。當那位長老根據摩尼派教條斷言這一點時,奧古斯丁便力圖駁斥他,同時召他去參加公開辯論,好叫他解決那個他的前任福圖納圖斯曾經敗下陣來的問題。但那些辯論中另含有其他論題,這一點從記錄本身的次序中已然顯明。此外,奧古斯丁無論在《訂正錄》(Retractations)諸卷中,還是在會談記錄中,都不曾聲稱他把這封信寄給了斐理斯;而波西狄烏斯在《奧古斯丁傳》中也保持了這同樣的緘默,這是完全明白無疑的。
202:29
Fateor igitur me prorsus latere quibus conjecturis insistere debeam, ne temere suspicer, epistolam de qua agimus Felici Manichæo presbytero Augustinum inscribere potuisse. Id tamen melius atque facilius alii judicabunt, cum jam ad hos præcavendos scopulos, in quos postremi Augustini Operum editores incidisse videntur, nibil deinde statuentes, ad certiora alia describenda gradum potius facere deliberamus.
I confess, therefore, that it wholly escapes me on what conjectures I ought to rely, in order not to suspect rashly that the letter of which we are treating could have been addressed by Augustine to Felix the Manichaean presbyter. This, however, others will judge better and more easily; since, now that we have provided against these reefs, upon which the latest editors of Augustine's Works seem to have run aground, deciding nothing further thereupon, we prefer rather to make a step toward describing other more certain matters.
因此我承認,我完全不知道我應憑什麼推測,才不至於冒然懷疑我們所討論的這封信有可能是奧古斯丁寫給摩尼派長老斐理斯的。不過,這事別人會判斷得更好、更容易;既然我們如今已提防了這些暗礁——奧古斯丁著作最新的編者們似乎在其上觸礁擱淺——我們對此不再作進一步的裁定,寧可邁步前去描述其他更為確定的事情。
← ch. 201ch. 203 →
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255