Saint Caecilius

Octavius and Minutius, who had nothing left to desire for themselves, ardently wished to associate Caecilius with their happiness; but the undertaking was difficult, and it required from them all the efforts of zeal and friendship. The first prejudices of education leave such deep traces in the mind that, with all the good will and candor of soul imaginable, they are only erased with infinite difficulty. When it comes to religion, prejudices have even more power: one is naturally inclined to remain in that of one's fathers, whose principles one has sucked in with one's mother's milk. Caecilius was in this case. Moreover, he was a man of the world, little scrupulous in matters of morality, and consequently little disposed to grasp sustained reasoning. He had wit and talent; but he was his own idol. He sighed only for pleasures and applause. Until then, his primary religion had been to serve himself. Indeed, we see him in the dispute sometimes rejecting all divinity and all providence, sometimes admitting these two points, and soon after superstitiously defending all the gods worshipped at that time in the universe. We shall say, to complete his portrait, that philosophy had only served to nourish his pride, to give him much presumption and self-sufficiency, and to render him incapable of feeling the solidity of an argument.

Despite this strength of character, Caecilius became, with the help of grace, an illustrious convert, a great Saint, and, by all appearances, the author of the conversion of Saint Cyprian. Octavius and Minuc ius were Minutius Roman lawyer of African origin, author of the dialogue Octavius. the instruments that God employed to bring him to the knowledge of the truth. They began by addressing fervent prayers to heaven in order to interest it in favor of their friend. The victory they finally won over him was the fruit of their piety and of a conference they all three had together. Minucius left us the summary of it in a dialogue he titled Octavius, in honor of his friend who bore that name and who had died when he wrote it down.

The order and design of this dialogue are of great beauty: everything in it announces a master's hand. From the beginning, the author insinuates himself imperceptibly into the soul through charming traits that he highlights in the character of his dear Octavius; from there he leads to the occasion of the conference with such interesting images, and paints the smallest objects with such beautiful colors, that he has in a way won the heart before having entered into the subject. After having expressed his sorrow and his regrets over the death of Octavius, he continues thus: "He always burned for me with the same fire. He loved me so passionately that, as much in our affairs as in our amusements, an amiable sympathy united us constantly, and our two souls were, so to speak, but one." He recalls with gratitude the advantages he has drawn from the example of his friend and excites himself to fervor by the memory of his virtues. "In preserving," he says, "his memory in my heart, I try to follow him with my thoughts and to detach my heart more and more from all earthly affection." Then he makes a recapitulation of this famous conversation by which Caecilius was led to the faith. The occasion that gave rise to it is described in the following manner.

Octavius came to Rome to visit his friend Minutius. His wife, his children, and the rest of his family wanted in vain to prevent him from making this trip. It was then autumn. Thanks to the court holidays, Minutius found himself freed from his ordinary occupations. He took advantage of this time to go to Ostia to take the sea baths, with the view of drying out the humors with Ostie Episcopal see held by Peter Damian. which he was troubled. Octavius and Caecilius wanted to be part of the party. Walking one day all three early in the morning in the city to go to the seashore, Caecilius caught sight of a statue of Serapis; upon which he brought his hand to his mouth and kissed it, which was an act of adoration among the Greeks and Romans. Octavius took the opportunity to say to Minutius that it was a crime and a shame for them that their friend remained always plunged in the darkness of error, and that he rendered divine worship to stones which, for having received a figure and a sort of consecration, did not cease for all that to be deaf and dumb. Caecilius was stung upon hearing himself accused of ignorance. He addressed himself to Octavius to propose a formal dispute on the matter in question. "I will prove to you," he added with a triumphant air, "that until now you have never had to deal with a philosopher." The proposal having been immediately accepted, they all three sat down on an eminence that served as a shelter for the bath. Minutius was placed in the middle with the capacity of arbitrator.

Caecilius, adopting a decisive and sharp tone, began by denying the reality of a Providence. He relied on the subtlety of his mind and the power of his eloquence. He first objected to the poverty of the Christians, everywhere subject to the idolaters whose flourishing empire attracted all eyes. To hear him, the dominant religion must be considered the best; the Christians were but wretches who persisted in starving, who took a foolish pleasure in suffering various tortures, who carried their extravagance to the point of despising life, fortune, and all the goods of the world, and who did not even have a church to worship their one and only God. Their sect, he continues, is but a collection of vile and despicable people, who hide in holes, without knowing how to say a single word in their defense, and who, in the darkness, occupy themselves with singing of a supposed resurrection and the chimerical joys of another world. He especially leveled his batteries against the resurrection of the body, which has always been, in fact, a stumbling block for the ancient philosophers, as can be seen in the writings of Athenagoras, Tertullian, Origen, and the other apologists of our holy religion: but slanders were the main resource of this champion of error. This sort of weapon was not new; the demon had invented it through the instruments of his jealousy. If one were to stick to the system of morality that the Gospel proposes, and examine in good faith the motives and means of perfection it provides, the most furious enemies of Christianity could not have refused it their esteem and respect. What happened? Our religion was disfigured to make it hateful, and the veil of slander was cast over that radiant beauty which attests that its origin is celestial.

Caecilius believed himself safe in this last entrenchment and flattered himself that he was strong enough there to strike down his adversary. He therefore began to object to Octavius the nocturnal assemblies of the Christians, their inhuman meals, and other alleged crimes for which their religion served as a pretext. "I hear it said," he continued, "that they worship the head of an ass, the knees of their priest or bishop, as well as a man punished for his crimes, and the cursed wood of the cross." He ridiculed the Christians for despising present torments in order to avoid invisible ones; for forbidding themselves legitimate pleasures, such as games, spectacles, feasts, and perfumes which they reserved for their dead, etc.

Octavius Octavius Friend of Caecilius and Minucius, principal defender of the faith in the eponymous dialogue. follows his adversary step by step, in order to refute him with greater order and solidity. He begins by establishing a Providence that presides over all human affairs, and from this he draws proof from the design and harmony that are strikingly evident in the works of nature. This proof, while accessible to the most ordinary minds, nonetheless possesses a force and evidence that all the subtlety imaginable can neither elude nor weaken. Indeed, one discovers in every part of the universe an arrangement so regular and a combination so wise that it is impossible not to recognize that all this is the work of a sovereign intelligence. "I suppose," says Octavius, "that you were to enter a house where the rooms were magnificently furnished and where everything was in the most perfect order: could you, at such a sight, doubt that there was in the house a master who watches over everything and whose nature is far superior to that of the furnishings you admire? Likewise, when you contemplate the heaven and the earth, and consider the harmony and the chain that form an admirable whole from different beings, you cannot call into doubt the existence of a supreme Lord who, by his perfections, eclipses the brilliance of the stars and who is infinitely more worthy of admiration than all the works of his hands."

Providence established, Octavius proves that there is only one God, that this God is spirit, the Father and Creator of all; that he is eternal, and that before the creation of the world he was a world unto himself; that he is infinite, immense, and incomprehensible to any created being. "Our intelligence," he says, "is too limited to reach up to him, and we never conceive of him better than when we view him as incomprehensible." He takes this as an occasion to show the absurdity of polytheism, and all the extravagances into which the pagans fell regarding their gods; coming then to their idols, he shows that they are nothing but demons. "Many of you," he continues, "know that demons are forced to testify against themselves, whenever, by words whose virtue they cannot withstand, we drive them from the bodies they possess." You judge well that if they were the masters of them, they would not betray themselves thus to their confusion, especially in the presence of you who adore them. You must therefore rely on them, and believe that they are demons, since you hear it from their own mouths. When we conjure them in the name of one God, the living God, these wretches tremble; they suddenly abandon the bodies they possessed, or at least they withdraw little by little, according to the faith of the patient or the grace of the healer.

Caecilius, embarrassed by these reasonings, renounces his first principles, but does not believe himself any less strong against Christianity for that. This was undoubtedly abandoning the cause of idolatry, and such a weak resource revealed the defeat of its apologist. Caecilius was no more successful in attacking the evidence of evangelical revelation. All his reasons rested on gross calumnies, drawn from some of our dogmas that were altered or taken by halves, and from our discipline that was falsified or misunderstood. The only thing Octavius had to do to answer these calumnies was to deny them absolutely, and to give a clear exposition of the holiness of our doctrine. As for that old fable of an ass's head adored by Christians, a fable that had first been circulated against the Jews, Octavius simply says that the fact was false, and he challenged his adversary to show its truth. He likewise denied that we worship the knees of the bishop. This accusation, as frivolous as the other, was based on the fact that penitents prostrated themselves when the bishop gave them absolution for their sins or his blessing. "You are no more authorized," continued Octavius, "to accuse us of incest in the celebration of our mysteries. Can one impute such a crime to people so known for the purity of their morals and of whom a great number take a vow of chastity? It is you who should be reproached for the horrors with which you charge us. Who does not know that you place a Priapus in the rank of gods; that you sacrifice to Venus the prostitute; that you celebrate the festivals of the Good Goddess, and that you practice a thousand other abominations that it is not possible to name without blushing?" He remarks that Christians, far from eating children or defiling themselves with infamies, did not even go to see criminals executed, and that they abstained from blood; that those who married took only one wife; that many lived in perpetual continence, without however glorifying themselves for their state; that, finally, the slightest thought of crime was condemned among them.

All these calumnies, as we have observed, came either from the malice of the pagans, or from the little knowledge they had of our dogmas or our mysteries: the abominations of the Carpocratians and the Gnostics, who passed themselves off as Christians, had also contributed much to giving them credence. The idolaters also reproached us for venerating all the criminals who were crucified, as one sees in Origen, and Caecilius accused us of adoring crosses; but Octavius shows that the accusation is false. "The external respect that Christians had for the cross, and the frequent use they made of it, gave the pagans, inclined to take everything in a bad light, occasion to tax them with adoring a cross." Caecilius also reproached us for having no temples or known images, *nulla nota simulacra*. These words do not imply an exclusion of all images, but only those of the gods known in the empire.

He observes that Pythagoras, Plato, and the other pagan philosophers had learned the dogma of the immortality of the soul as well as the truths they taught (though mixed with many falsehoods) through an imperfect tradition of the divine revelation made to the ancient patriarchs. He says that Christians bury the dead instead of burning them, because it is the ancient and better custom, and that God can equally resurrect them, whether from ash or from dust. He establishes the eternity of the fire of hell, which the infidels deserve just as justly as the impious, "because it is no lesser crime to ignore the common Lord, the Father of all men and of all beings, than to dare to break his commandments."

Octavius ends his discourse with a short but charming description of Christian morality. He expresses himself thus, in answering the reproach of poverty with which Caecilius had charged the disciples of Jesus Christ:

"What then! Can one call poor the one who feels no need? This title only suits the one whose heart is not satisfied in the midst of abundance. No one could be poorer than he was when coming into the world. The art of the Christian, to possess everything, is to desire nothing. The lighter a traveler is, the more at ease he finds himself; likewise in the journey of this life, the one whom poverty makes light is incomparably happier than the one who is overwhelmed under the weight of riches. If riches seemed necessary to us, we would ask them of God. Innocence is the only object of our desires, and patience the only thing we ask for. Misfortune is the school of virtue. What a beautiful spectacle for the Divinity, to contemplate the Christian in the arena grappling with pain, fighting with noble constancy against threats, wheels, and racks, in that moment especially when, like a conqueror, he triumphs over the judge who condemns him! For that one is certainly the victor, who carries off the prize for which he has contended." He says that our religion consists in practice and not in fine speeches. "We do not say great things, but we do them."

Scarcely had Octavius ceased speaking, when Caecilius exclaimed: "I congratulate you and I congratulate myself. We are both victorious. Octavius triumphs over me, and I triumph over error; but the victory and the gain are mainly on my side, since, by my defeat, I find the crown of truth."

Such is the summary of this famous conference; but the beauty of the ideas and the language can only be well perceived in the original. If this dialogue seems to have any defect, it is that of being short. The reader is sorry to find himself at the end so soon, and he leaves it only with regret, which is the mark of excellent productions.

The company agreed that there would be another meeting to initiate Caecilius more fully into the Christian religion and to make him acquainted with its discipline. The beauty of the first meeting gives cause to greatly regret the second, which was to revolve around such an interesting subject.

Baronius and several other historians have no doubt that our Saint is the same Caeci lius, the priest Cécilius, prêtre African priest, converted by Octavius and Minucius Felix, mentor of Saint Cyprian. who later converted Sa int Cyprian. saint Cyprien Bishop of Africa who opposed Stephen on the question of baptism. They were both Africans, of the same age and the same profession. Moreover, Saint Cyprian included in his writings various things borrowed from the dialogue we have analyzed, which had undoubtedly been communicated to him by Caecilius. Out of respect for the memory of the latter, he took his name, which he added before his own, and wished to be called Cæcilius Cyprianus.

It is read i n Ponti Pontius Deacon and biographer of Saint Cyprian. us that the priest Caecilius was a just man, venerable for his age, worthy of living eternally in the memory of men. This author adds that Saint Cyprian always honored him as his father, and that he retained for him the deepest feelings of veneration and gratitude. Saint Caecilius is named in the Roman Martyrology.

[APPENDIX: NOTE ON MINUCIUS FELIX.]

No pagan author of this century wrote in Latin with as much purity and elegance. The tincture of the African dialect that one notices in a few places is like that *patavinity* that the delicate ear of a Roman discovered in *Livy*.

By pleading at the bar and seeing the good company of Rome, Minucius had shed the harshness of his national style and had substituted for it the politeness of the Latin idiom. The beauty and accuracy of his thoughts are an unequivocal proof of his judgment. The candor with which he expresses himself reveals in him an amiable fund of uprightness, kindness, frankness, and affability. Bold figures, picturesque images, a pure, flowing style of admirable sweetness, a tone of decency and gravity that is constantly maintained, all this shows that he was a man of the first order and that he knew perfectly the art of persuasion. No one possesses like him the talent to charm the reader and lead him where he pleases. He displays vast erudition and a profound knowledge of pagan theology. His reasonings are strong and conclusive; he watches with delicacy; he wounds and heals with the same hand, so well does he know how to prepare salt and satire. His mind is of an excellent nature; if it is brilliant, it is not at the expense of solidity; there is an intrinsic value and a luster that owes nothing to alloy. This remark is by Mr. Blackwall, in his *Introduction to the Study of the Classics*, p. 440. This ingenious writer adds the following:

"Minucius superiorly avenges Christianity of the calumnies of the pagans. His retorts are so just, so full of strength, and accompanied by such evidence of truth, that one concludes he is the most dangerous adversary one could fear in a bad cause, and the most skillful advocate one could desire to defend a good one."

The dialogue of Minucius Felix has been printed several times through the care of various scholars. Especially esteemed are the editions given in Paris by Rigand in 1643; in Holland, *cum notis variorum*, 1672, in-8°; in Cambridge, by John Davis, in 1767, in-9°; in Leiden, in 1769, in-8°; Mr. d'Ablancourt published a French translation which is passable and which has been reprinted several times.

*Taken from the dialogue of Minucius Felix, entitled *Octavius*, and from the *Life of Saint Cyprian*, by Pontius. See Tillemont, l. iii.; Cellier: *Reeve, Dissert. prélim.*, and Orsi, who gave an excellent analysis of the dialogue of Minucius Felix, in his *Ecclesiastical History*, t. ii., l. v., p. 453; Godescard, *ed. Lafort.*: