 |
| The Consecration of Saint Augustine (1460) by Jaume Huguet |
That the gods of the Romans never took any pains
to save the commonwealth
from being destroyed
by evil ways
 |
| Venus, Mars, and Cupid on a wall painting from Pompeii |
Rome was evil even before Jesus Christ's incarnation
 |
| Sol Invictus, or Christ depicted in his guise. 3rd century AD |
But as to the present question: however worthy of praise they say the commonwealth was or is, it had, according to their own most learned authors, already become entirely evil and profligate long before the coming of Christ. Indeed, it no longer existed, and had perished utterly by reason of its most corrupt morals. To save it from perishing, then, the gods who were its guardians ought above all else to have given precepts of life and morals to the people who worshipped them: by whom they were worshipped in so many temples and with so many priests and kinds of sacrifice, with such a number and variety of ties, and with so many solemn feasts and celebrations of such fine games. But the demons did nothing except look after their own affairs. They did not care how their worshippers lived: or, rather, they were content that their worshippers should live in wickedness provided only that they continued, under the dominion of fear, to do all these things in their honour.
The commonwealth descended into civil wars
 |
| Apparent bust of Sulla in the Munich Glyptothek |
On the other hand, if they did give such precepts, let something be produced or displayed. Let something be read out to show what laws of the gods were given to that city only to be despised by the Gracchi, when they threw all things into turmoil by their seditions; by Marius and Cinna and Carbo, when they proceeded even to civil wars -- undertaken for the most unworthy causes, cruelly waged, and more cruelly ended; and, finally, by Sulla himself. Who would not shudder at the life and character and deeds of Sulla as described by Sallust and other writers of history? Who would not admit that the commonwealth had by then perished.
The gods deserted Rome prior to Christianity
 |
| Virgil Reading the Aeneid to Augustus, Octavia, and Livia by Jean-Baptiste Wicar |
In view of the conduct of citizens of this wort, will our adversaries perhaps still venture to reply, as they usually do, with the passage from Virgil in defence of their gods? -- 'All the gods upon whom this real stood have gone, forsaking shrine and altar.' If so, then, first, they have no reason to complain that the Christian religion so offended their gods that they deserted them. For their own forebears, by their evil ways, had already driven all these numerous little gods away from the city's altars like so many flies. But where, in any case, was that swarm of divinities when, long before the ancient ways had fallen into decay, Rome was taken and burnt by the Gauls? Present but asleep, perhaps? For at that time the whole city fell into the power of the enemy, apart from the Capitoline Hill; and even that would have been taken had not the geese, at any rate, been awake while the gods slept. From this incident, Rome almost descended to the superstition of the Egyptians, who worship beasts and birds; for they honoured the goose in a yearly festival.
Rome's moral standards were corrupted little by little and then collapsed
.jpg) |
| Original film poster by Renato Fratini |
But these extrinsic things -- evils of the body rather than the soul, which are inflicted by enemies or by some other misfortune -- are for the moment not at issue. For the time being, I am concerned with the collapse of those moral standards which, corrupted little by little at first, then tumbled pell-mell like a torrent until, though the house and city walls remained intact, the commonwealth was so ruined that even its own most eminent authors do not hesitate to say that it was lost. To be sure, if they had given precepts concerning the good life and justice to the city and the city had ignored them, all the gods would have been right to give Rome up for lost, 'forsaking shrine and altar'. But what kinds of gods were they, I ask, who refused to dwell with a nation that worshipped them when that nation lived wickedly only because they had not taught it how to live well?
That the vicissitudes of the temporal world depend not upon the favour or opposition of demons,
but upon the judgment of the true God
 |
| Marcus Aurelius (head covered) sacrificing at the Temple of Jupiter |
Did the gods desert the excellent Regulus and assist Marius, but not help Marius escape from falling into the hands of Sulla?
 |
|
Regulus returning to Carthage (1791)
by Cornelis Cels
|
Furthermore, what of the fact that the gods seem to assist men in the gratification of their desires, yet manifestly do not help them to achieve restraint? Marius, for example, was an upstart and a man of low birth, a most bloodthirsty author and wager of civil wars. Did they help him to become consul seven times, and to die an old man in his seventh consulship so that he might not fall into the hands of Sulla, who was soon to become victorious? For if the gods did not help him to achieve these things, then it is no light matter to admit that men way acquire so much of that earthly felicity which they so dearly love even without the favour of their gods. It is no light matter to admit that such a man as Marius can amass and enjoy good health, strength, riches, honours, renown and long life in spite of the anger of the gods, whereas such men as Regulus can be tormented by captivity, servitude, poverty, sleeplessness and pain and suffer death even though the gods are their friends. If our adversaries grant this much, they concede at once that the gods bring them no benefit and that their worship is superfluous. For it seems that the gods are eager for the people to learn the very opposite of those virtues of soul and righteous ways of life whose rewards are to be hope for after death. It seems also that, with respect to transient and worldly goods, they do nothing either to injure those whom they hate or to benefit those whom they love. Why, then, are they worshipped? And why is the fact that they are not worshipped so grievously deplored? Why, in hard and sorrowful times, is it murmured that the gods have departed because they are offended, and the Christian religion subjected to the most unworthy reproaches for their sakes? For if they have power to do either good or harm in these matters, why did they assist Marius, the worst of men, in them, yet desert the excellent Regulus? In view of this, are they not to be deemed wholly unjust and wicked?
Roman rulers were rewarded and punished regardless of their worship of the Roman gods
 |
| Detail of Catiline in Cesare Maccari's fresco in Palazzo Madama |
And let no one suppose that their injustice and wickedness is to be thought all the more reason for fearing and worshipping them. For we do not find that Regulus worshipped them any less than Marius. Let no one suppose either that, because the gods are thought to have shown more favour to Marius than to Regulus, a wicked life is to be preferred. For Metellus, most highly esteemed of Romans, had five sons who became consuls, and was fortunate in temporal affairs besides; whereas the evil Catiline was unfortunate: borne down with poverty and destroyed in a war brought about by his own wickedness. Moreover, the truest and most certain felicity is in any case possessed only by those who worship the true God, by Whom alone it can be conferred.
The gods lent impetus to Rome's depravity and corruption of its morals, ensuring Rome's destruction
 |
| "Marius Amid the Ruins of Carthage" (1807) by John Vanderlyn |
So, then: when the commonwealth was perishing because of its evil ways, the gods did nothing either to guide or correct its morals so that it might now perish. On the contrary, they lent such impetus to the depravity and corruption of its morals as to ensure its destruction. And let them not make themselves out to be good, as if they had withdrawn because offended by the iniquity of the citizens. Beyond doubt they were present; they are exposed, they are convicted: they could neither help by admonishing nor hide by remaining silent. I leave aside the fact that Marius was commended by the compassionate men of Minturnae to the goddess Marica in her grove, so that she might prosper him in all things, and that from a most desperate plight he returned to the city unharmed, in cruel command of a cruel army. Those who wish to do so may read in the works of those who have written on the subject how bloody his victory was: how unworthy of a citizen and how much more brutal than an enemy's.
The real reason for the rise and fall of Rome was the providence of God
 |
| Bust of Gaius Marius at Munich Glyptothek |
But, as I have said, I leave this aside; nor do I attribute the bloodstained good fortune of Marius to Marica, or to I know not whom else, but rather to the hidden providence of God. For he shuts the mouths of our adversaries and frees from error those who are not actuated by prejudice but who prudently give heed to this truth: that, even though the demons may have some power in these matters, they can do only as much as is permitted them by the mysterious dispensation of the Almighty. This is so that we shall neither unduly value earthly happiness, which is often granted even to bad men like Marius, nor, on the other hand, pronounce it evil, since we see that many pious and good worshippers of the one true God have enjoyed outstanding felicity in spite of the demons. Nor should we suppose that these same most unclean spirits are to be propitiated or feared for the sake of these earthly goods or evils. For, like wicked men on earth, they also cannot do all that they wish, but only as much as is allowed by the ordinance of Him Whose judgements no man wholly understands and no man justly condemns.
Source: Augustine. The City of God against the Pagans. Edited and translated by R.W. Dyson.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, Book II, Chapter 22-23, pages 80-84.
.jpg)
