For example: St. Paul, being a Christian5, comes to the temple of the Jews to perform the Judaic rites6, in order to show that he does not forsake7 the Mosaic8 law; he is recognized at the end of a week and accused of having profaned9 the temple. Loaded with blows, he is dragged along by the mob; the tribune of the cohort — tribunis cohortis — arrives, and binds11 him with a double chain. The next day this tribune assembles the council and carries Paul before it, when the High Priest Ananias commences proceedings12 by giving him a box on the ear, on which Paul salutes13 him with the epithet14 of “a whited wall.”
“But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, ‘Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee, of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.’ And when he had so said there arose a discussion between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the multitude was divided. For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit, but the Pharisees confess both.”
It is very evident from the text that Paul was not a Pharisee after he became a Christian and that there was in this affair no question either of resurrection or hope, of angel or spirit.
The text shows that Paul spoke15 thus only to embroil16 the Pharisees and Sadducees. This was speaking with economy, that is to say, with prudence17; it was a pious18 artifice19 which, perhaps, would not have been permitted to any but an apostle.
It is thus that almost all the fathers of the Church have spoken “with economy.” St. Jerome develops this method admirably in his fifty-fourth letter to Pammachus. Weigh his words. After having said that there are occasions when it is necessary to present a loaf and to throw a stone, he continues thus:
“Pray read Demosthenes, read Cicero, and if these rhetoricians displease20 you because their art consists in speaking of the seeming rather than the true, read Plato, Theophrastus, Xenophon, Aristotle, and all those who, having dipped into the fountain of Socrates, drew different waters from it. Is there among them any candor21, any simplicity22? What terms among them are not ambiguous, and what sense do they not make free with to bear away the palm of victory? Origen, Methodius, Eusebius, Apollinarus, have written a million of arguments against Celsus and Porphyry. Consider with what artifice, with what problematic subtlety23 they combat the spirit of the devil. They do not say what they think, but what it is expedient24 to say: Non quod sentiunt, sed quod necesse est dicunt. And not to mention other Latins — Tertullian, Cyprian, Minutius, Victorinus, Lactantius, and Hilarius — whom I will not cite here; I will content myself with relating the example of the Apostle Paul,” etc.
St. Augustine often writes with economy. He so accommodates himself to time and circumstances that in one of his epistles he confesses that he explained the Trinity only because he must say something.
Assuredly this was not because he doubted the Holy Trinity, but he felt how ineffable25 this mystery is and wished to content the curiosity of the people.
This method was always received in theology. It employed an argument against the Eucratics, which was the cause of triumph to the Carpocratians; and when it afterwards disputed with the Carpocratians its arms were changed.
It is asserted that Jesus Christ died for many when the number of rejected is set forth26, but when his universal bounty27 is to be manifested he is said to have died for all. Here you take the real sense for the figurative; there the figurative for the real, as prudence and expediency28 direct.
Such practices are not admitted in justice. A witness would be punished who told the pour and contre of a capital offence. But there is an infinite difference between vile29 human interests, which require the greatest clearness, and divine interests, which are hidden in an impenetrable abyss. The same judges who require indubitable demonstrative proofs will be contented30 in sermons with moral proofs, and even with declamations exhibiting no proofs at all.
St. Augustine speaks with economy, when he says, “I believe, because it is absurd; I believe, because it is impossible.” These words, which would be extravagant31 in all worldly affairs, are very respectable in theology. They signify that what is absurd and impossible to mortal eyes is not so to the eyes of God; God has revealed to me these pretended absurdities32, these apparent impossibilities, therefore I ought to believe them.
An advocate would not be allowed to speak thus at the bar. They would confine in a lunatic asylum33 a witness who might say, “I assert that the accused, while shut up in a country house in Martinique, killed a man in Paris, and I am the more certain of this homicide because it is absurd and impossible.” But revelations, miracles, and faith are quite a distinct order of things.
The same St. Augustine observes in his one hundred and fifty-third letter, “It is written that the whole world belongs to the faithful, and infidels have not an obolus that they possess legitimately35.”
If upon this principle a brace36 of bankers were to wait upon me to assure me that they were of the faithful, and in that capacity had appropriated the property belonging to me, a miserable37 worldling, to themselves, it is certain that they would be committed to the Chatelet, in spite of the economy of the language of St. Augustine.
St. Iren?us asserts that we must not condemn38 the incest of the two daughters of Lot, nor that of Thamar with her father-in-law, because the Holy Scripture39 has not expressly declared them criminal. This verbal economy prevents not the legal punishment of incest among ourselves. It is true that if the Lord expressly ordered people to commit incest it would not be sinful, which is the economy of Iren?us. His laudable object is to make us respect everything in the Holy Scriptures40, but as God has not expressly praised the foregoing doings of the daughters of Lot and of Judah we are permitted to condemn them.
All the first Christians41, without exception, thought of war like the Quakers and Dunkards of the present day, and the Brahmins, both ancient and modern. Tertullian is the father who is most explicit42 against this legal species of murder, which our vile human nature renders expedient. “No custom, no rule,” says he, “can render this criminal destruction legitimate34.”
Nevertheless, after assuring us that no Christian can carry arms, he says, “by economy,” in the same book, in order to intimidate43 the Roman Empire, “although of such recent origin, we fill your cities and your armies.”
It is in the same spirit that he asserts that Pilate was a Christian in his heart, and the whole of his apology is filled with similar assertions, which redoubled the zeal44 of his proselytes.
Let us terminate these examples of the economical style, which are numberless, by a passage of St. Jerome, in his controversy45 with Jovian upon second marriages. The holy Jerome roundly asserts that it is plain, by the formation of the two sexes — in the description of which he is rather particular — that they are destined46 for each other, and for propagation. It follows, therefore, that they are to make love without ceasing, in order that their respective faculties47 may not be bestowed48 in vain. This being the case, why should not men and women marry again? Why, indeed, is a man to deny his wife to his friend if a cessation of attention on his own part be personally convenient? He may present the wife of another with a loaf of bread if she be hungry, and why may not her other wants be supplied, if they are urgent? Functions are not given to lie dormant49, etc.
After such a passage it is useless to quote any more, but it is necessary to remark, by the way, that the economical style, so intimately connected with the polemical, ought to be employed with the greatest circumspection50, and that it belongs not to the profane10 to imitate the things hazarded by the saints, either as regards the heat of their zeal or the piquancy51 of their delivery.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
consecrated
|
|
| adj.神圣的，被视为神圣的v.把…奉为神圣，给…祝圣( consecrate的过去式和过去分词 )；奉献 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
appropriation
|
|
| n.拨款，批准支出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
primitive
|
|
| adj.原始的；简单的；n.原(始)人，原始事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
oratory
|
|
| n.演讲术；词藻华丽的言辞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
rites
|
|
| 仪式，典礼( rite的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
forsake
|
|
| vt.遗弃，抛弃；舍弃，放弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
mosaic
|
|
| n./adj.镶嵌细工的，镶嵌工艺品的，嵌花式的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
profaned
|
|
| v.不敬( profane的过去式和过去分词 )；亵渎，玷污 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
profane
|
|
| adj.亵神的，亵渎的；vt.亵渎，玷污 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
binds
|
|
| v.约束( bind的第三人称单数 )；装订；捆绑；（用长布条）缠绕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
proceedings
|
|
| n.进程，过程，议程；诉讼(程序)；公报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
salutes
|
|
| n.致敬，欢迎，敬礼( salute的名词复数 )v.欢迎，致敬( salute的第三人称单数 )；赞扬，赞颂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
epithet
|
|
| n.（用于褒贬人物等的）表述形容词，修饰语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
embroil
|
|
| vt.拖累；牵连；使复杂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
prudence
|
|
| n.谨慎，精明，节俭 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
pious
|
|
| adj.虔诚的；道貌岸然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
artifice
|
|
| n.妙计，高明的手段；狡诈，诡计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
displease
|
|
| vt.使不高兴，惹怒；n.不悦，不满，生气 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
candor
|
|
| n.坦白，率真 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
simplicity
|
|
| n.简单，简易；朴素；直率，单纯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
subtlety
|
|
| n.微妙，敏锐，精巧；微妙之处，细微的区别 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
expedient
|
|
| adj.有用的，有利的；n.紧急的办法，权宜之计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
ineffable
|
|
| adj.无法表达的，不可言喻的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
bounty
|
|
| n.慷慨的赠予物，奖金；慷慨，大方；施与 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
expediency
|
|
| n.适宜；方便；合算；利己 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
vile
|
|
| adj.卑鄙的，可耻的，邪恶的；坏透的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
contented
|
|
| adj.满意的，安心的，知足的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
extravagant
|
|
| adj.奢侈的；过分的；(言行等)放肆的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
absurdities
|
|
| n.极端无理性( absurdity的名词复数 )；荒谬；谬论；荒谬的行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
asylum
|
|
| n.避难所，庇护所，避难 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
legitimate
|
|
| adj.合法的，合理的，合乎逻辑的；v.使合法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
legitimately
|
|
| ad.合法地；正当地，合理地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
brace
|
|
| n. 支柱,曲柄,大括号; v. 绷紧,顶住,(为困难或坏事)做准备 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
miserable
|
|
| adj.悲惨的，痛苦的；可怜的，糟糕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
condemn
|
|
| vt.谴责，指责；宣判(罪犯)，判刑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
scripture
|
|
| n.经文，圣书，手稿；Scripture:(常用复数)《圣经》，《圣经》中的一段 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
scriptures
|
|
| 经文，圣典( scripture的名词复数 )； 经典 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
Christians
|
|
| n.基督教徒( Christian的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
explicit
|
|
| adj.详述的，明确的；坦率的；显然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
intimidate
|
|
| vt.恐吓，威胁 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
zeal
|
|
| n.热心，热情，热忱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
controversy
|
|
| n.争论，辩论，争吵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
destined
|
|
| adj.命中注定的；(for)以…为目的地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
faculties
|
|
| n.能力( faculty的名词复数 )；全体教职员；技巧；院 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
bestowed
|
|
| 赠给，授予( bestow的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
dormant
|
|
| adj.暂停活动的；休眠的；潜伏的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
circumspection
|
|
| n.细心，慎重 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
piquancy
|
|
| n.辛辣，辣味，痛快 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |