On the Workmanship of God 1.1–6.15
Latin text: CSEL 27.1 (Latin text: S. Brandt and G. Laubmann (CSEL 27.1, 1893), digitized by Open Greek and Latin, University of Leipzig (csel-dev), CC BY-SA 4.0).English: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), public domain (CC0). Compare: Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 7 (1886).
Chapter 1
1.1CSEL 27.1:4
Quam minime sim quietus etiam in summis necessitatibus, ex hoc libello poteris aestimare, quem ad te rudibus paene uerbis prout ingenii mediocritas tulit, Demetriane, perscripsi, ut et cotidianum studium meum nosses et non deessem tibi praeceptor etiam nunc, sed honestioris rei meliorisque doctrinae.
How little I am at rest even in the greatest straits, you will be able to judge from this little book, Demetrianus, which I have written out to you in words almost unpolished, as far as my modest talent allowed, so that you might know my daily study, and so that I might not fail you as a teacher even now, but of a more honorable subject and a better teaching.
Notes and citation
Summary: Lactantius dedicates the book to his former pupil Demetrianus as proof that he keeps studying even in hard times.
- Demetrianus was Lactantius's former pupil in rhetoric. “The greatest straits” probably refers to the persecution under Diocletian (from 303), during which the work is usually dated.
Topics: Persecution
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.1 (CSEL 27.1:4; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-1).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.2CSEL 27.1:4
nam si te in litteris nihil aliud quam linguam instruentibus auditorem satis strenuum praebuisti, quanto magis in his ueris et ad uitam pertinentibus docilior esse debebis? apud quem nunc profiteor nulla me necessitate uel rei uel temporis inpediri, quominus aliquid extundam quo philosophi sectae nostrae quam tuemur instructiores doctioresque in posterum fiant, quamuis nunc male audiant castigenturque uulgo, quod aliter quam sapientibus conuenit uiuant et uitia sub obtentu nominis celent: quibus illos aut mederi oportuit aut ea prorsus effugere, ut beatum atque incorruptum sapientiae nomen uita ipsa cum praeceptis congruente praestarent.
For if you proved yourself a sufficiently diligent hearer in the literary studies that train nothing but the tongue, how much more teachable ought you to be in these things that are true and concern life? To you I now declare that I am hindered by no necessity, either of circumstance or of time, from hammering out something by which the philosophers of our school, which we defend, may become better instructed and more learned for the future, although they are now in ill repute and are commonly censured for living otherwise than befits the wise and for hiding their vices under the cover of the name; vices which they ought either to have cured or to have escaped altogether, so as to show forth the blessed and incorrupt name of wisdom by a life agreeing with their precepts.
Notes and citation
Summary: Lactantius promises to write for the benefit of Christians, “the philosophers of our school,” who are criticized for not living up to their name.
- “The philosophers of our school” are Christians; Lactantius presents Christianity as the true philosophy.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.2 (CSEL 27.1:4; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-2).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.3CSEL 27.1:4
ego tamen ut nos ipsos simul et ceteros instruam, laborem nullum recuso. neque enim possum obliuisci mei tum praesertim, cum maxime opus sit meminisse, sicut ne tu quidem tui, ut spero et opto.
Yet, so as to instruct both ourselves and others at once, I refuse no labor. For I cannot forget myself, especially at a time when it is most necessary to remember, just as you too do not forget yourself, as I hope and wish.
Notes and citation
Summary: Lactantius will spare no labor, remembering his calling, and hopes Demetrianus does the same.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.3 (CSEL 27.1:4; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-3).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.4CSEL 27.1:4
nam licet te publicae rei necessitas a ueris et iustis operibus auertat, tamen fieri non potest quin subinde in caelum aspiciat mens sibi conscia recti.
For although the necessity of public affairs turns you away from true and just works, yet it cannot be that a mind conscious of what is right does not from time to time look up to heaven.
Notes and citation
Summary: Even amid public duties, a good conscience looks up to heaven.
- “A mind conscious of what is right” (mens sibi conscia recti) is a quotation from Virgil, Aeneid 1.604.
Extrabiblical texts: Virgil, Aen. 1.604 (Virgil; quotation)
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.4 (CSEL 27.1:4; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-4).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.5CSEL 27.1:4–5
et quidem laetor omnia tibi quae pro bonis habentur prospere fluere, sed ita, si nihil de statu mentis inmutent. uereor enim ne paulatim consuetudo et iucunditas earum rerum sicut fieri solet in animum tuum inrepat,
And indeed I am glad that all the things counted as goods are flowing prosperously for you, but only if they change nothing in the state of your mind. For I fear that little by little the habit and pleasantness of those things may creep into your mind, as usually happens;
Notes and citation
Summary: Lactantius rejoices in his friend's prosperity but fears it may gradually corrupt his mind.
Topics: Ethics
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.5 (CSEL 27.1:4–5; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-5).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-5) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.6CSEL 27.1:5
ideoque te moneo et repetens iterum(que) iterumque monebo, ne oblectamenta ista terrae pro magnis aut ueris bonis habere te credas, quae sunt non tantum fallacia, quia dubia, uerum etiam insidiosa, quia dulcia.
and therefore I warn you, and repeating it I will warn you again and again, not to believe that those delights of the earth are great or true goods; they are not only deceptive, because uncertain, but also treacherous, because sweet.
Notes and citation
Summary: Earthly pleasures are not true goods but deceptive and treacherous.
Topics: Ethics
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.6 (CSEL 27.1:5; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-6).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-6) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.7CSEL 27.1:5
nam ille conluctator et aduersarius noster scis quam sit astutus et idem saepe uiolentus, sicuti nunc uidemus. is haec omnia quae inlicere possunt, pro laqueis habet et quidem tam subtilibus, ut oculos mentis effugiant, ne possint hominis prouisione uitari.
For you know how cunning that wrestler and adversary of ours is, and at the same time often violent, as we now see. He holds all these things that can allure as snares, and indeed so fine that they escape the eyes of the mind, so that they cannot be avoided by human foresight.
Eph 6:12 (echo, low confidence)
Notes and citation
Summary: The devil, cunning and now violent, uses earthly allurements as invisible snares.
- “Violent, as we now see” refers to the persecution then under way. The devil as “wrestler” echoes Eph 6:12.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (misread letters in the digital text): aduersanus → aduersarius.
Topics: Persecution
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.7 (CSEL 27.1:5; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-7).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-7) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.8CSEL 27.1:5
summa ergo prudentia est pedetemptim procedere, quoniam utrubique saltus insidet et offensacula pedibus latenter opponit.
So the greatest prudence is to go forward step by step, since the wood lies in ambush on both sides and secretly sets stumbling blocks for the feet.
Notes and citation
Summary: Caution is needed, since snares lie hidden on every side.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.8 (CSEL 27.1:5; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-8).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-8) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.9CSEL 27.1:5
itaque res tuas prosperas in quibus nunc agis suadeo ut pro tua uirtute aut contemnas, si potes, aut non magno opere mireris. memento et ueri parentis tui et in qua ciuitate nomen dederis et cuius ordinis fueris: intellegis profecto quid loquar.
So I urge you, as befits your virtue, either to despise, if you can, the prosperity in which you now live, or not to admire it greatly. Remember both your true Father, and in what city you have enrolled your name, and of what order you have been: you surely understand what I mean.
Phil 3:20 (echo, low confidence)
Notes and citation
Summary: Demetrianus should despise or at least not admire his prosperity, remembering his heavenly Father and citizenship.
- “In what city you have enrolled your name” refers to Christian citizenship in the heavenly city (compare Phil 3:20; Heb 12:22); the veiled language (“you surely understand what I mean”) suits a time of persecution.
Topics: Ethics
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.9 (CSEL 27.1:5; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-9).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-9) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.10CSEL 27.1:5
nec enim te superbiae arguo, cuius in te ne suspicio quidem ulla est, sed ea quae dico, ad mentem referenda sunt, non ad corpus: cuius omnis ratio ideo conparata est, ut animo tamquam domino seruiat et regatur nutu eius.
For I do not accuse you of pride, of which there is not even any suspicion in you; but what I say must be referred to the mind, not to the body, whose whole design was arranged so that it might serve the soul as its master and be ruled by its nod.
Notes and citation
Summary: The body was designed to serve and obey the soul as its master.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.10 (CSEL 27.1:5; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-10).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-10) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.11CSEL 27.1:5–6
uas est enim quodammodo fictile quo animus id est homo ipse uerus continetur, et quidem non a Prometheo fictum, ut poetae locuntur, sed a summo illo rerum conditore atque artifice deo, cuius diuinam prouidentiam perfectissimamque uirtutem nec sensu conprehendere nec uerbo enarrare possibile est. temptabo tamen, quoniam corporis et animi facta mentio est, utriusque rationem quantum pusillitas intellegentiae meae peruidet, explicare.
For it is in a way an earthen vessel, in which the soul, that is, the true man himself, is contained, and one not fashioned by Prometheus, as the poets say, but by that supreme founder and craftsman of things, God, whose divine providence and most perfect power it is possible neither to grasp with the senses nor to tell in words. Yet I will attempt, since mention has been made of body and soul, to explain the design of each, as far as the smallness of my understanding sees through it.
2 Cor 4:7 (echo, medium confidence) · Gen 2:7 (echo, medium confidence)
Notes and citation
Summary: The body is an earthen vessel for the soul, made not by Prometheus but by God, and Lactantius will try to explain the design of both.
- The “earthen vessel” echoes 2 Cor 4:7; the myth that Prometheus shaped men from clay is common in the poets (e.g. Ovid, Metamorphoses 1.82–83).
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray period in the digital text): uas est enim. quodammodo → uas est enim quodammodo.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.11 (CSEL 27.1:5–6; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-11).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-11) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.12CSEL 27.1:6
quod officium hac de causa maxime suscipiendum puto, quod Marcus Tullius uir ingenii singularis in quarto De re publica libro, cum id facere temptasset, materiam late patentem angustis finibus terminauit leuiter summa quaeque decerpens.
I think this task must be undertaken chiefly for this reason: that Marcus Tullius, a man of singular talent, in the fourth book On the Republic, when he had attempted to do it, confined a widely extending subject within narrow limits, lightly plucking only the chief points.
Notes and citation
Summary: Cicero treated this subject too briefly in On the Republic, book 4.
- Marcus Tullius is Cicero. The fourth book of his On the Republic survives only in fragments; this passage is itself a witness to its contents.
Extrabiblical texts: Cicero, Resp. 4 (Cicero; allusion)
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.12 (CSEL 27.1:6; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-12).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-12) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.13CSEL 27.1:6
ac ne ulla esset excusatio cur eum locum non fuerit exsecutus, ipse testatus est nec uoluntatem sibi defuisse nec curam. in libro enim De legibus primo cum hoc idem summatim stringeret, sic ait: hunc locum satis, ut mihi uidetur, in iis libris quos legistis expressit Scipio. postea tamen in libro De natura deorum secundo hoc idem latius exsequi conatus est.
And lest there be any excuse why he did not follow that topic through, he himself testified that he lacked neither the will nor the care. For in the first book On the Laws, when he was touching on this same point in summary, he says thus: “This topic, as it seems to me, Scipio expressed sufficiently in those books which you have read.” Afterward, however, in the second book On the Nature of the Gods, he tried to treat this same point more fully.
Notes and citation
Summary: Cicero referred to his treatment in On the Laws and tried again in On the Nature of the Gods, book 2.
- The quotation is Cicero, On the Laws 1.27; the fuller treatment is On the Nature of the Gods 2.133–153.
Extrabiblical texts: Cicero, Leg. 1.27 (Cicero; quotation); Cicero, Nat. d. 2.133–153 (Cicero; allusion)
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.13 (CSEL 27.1:6; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-13).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-13) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.14CSEL 27.1:6–7
sed quoniam ne ibi quidem satis expressit, adgrediar hoc munus et sumam mihi audaciter explicandum quod homo disertissimus paene omisit intactum.
But since he did not express it sufficiently even there, I will take up this duty and boldly undertake to explain what that most eloquent man left almost untouched.
Notes and citation
Summary: Since Cicero did not finish the task, Lactantius will undertake it.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray hyphen in the digital text): homo-disertissimus → homo disertissimus.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.14 (CSEL 27.1:6–7; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-14).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-14) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.15CSEL 27.1:7
forsitan reprehendas quod in rebus obscuris coner aliquid disputare, cum uideas tanta temeritate homines extitisse, qui uulgo philosophi nominantur, ut ea quae abstrusa prorsus atque abdita deus esse uoluit, scrutarentur ac naturam rerum caelestium terrenarumque conquirerent, quae a nobis longe remotae neque oculis contrectari neque tangi manu neque percipi sensibus possunt: et tamen de illarum omnium ratione sic disputant, ut ea quae adferunt probata et cognita uideri uelint.
Perhaps you will blame me for attempting to discuss something in obscure matters, when you see that there have been men of such rashness, those commonly called philosophers, that they searched out things which God willed to be wholly hidden and concealed, and inquired into the nature of heavenly and earthly things, which, being far removed from us, can neither be handled by the eyes nor touched by the hand nor perceived by the senses; and yet they argue about the design of all these things in such a way that they want what they put forward to seem proved and known.
Notes and citation
Summary: Philosophers rashly claim certain knowledge of hidden heavenly and earthly things beyond the senses.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.15 (CSEL 27.1:7; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-15).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-15) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
1.16CSEL 27.1:7
quid est tandem cur nobis inuidiosum quisquam putet, si rationem corporis nostri dispicere et contemplari uelimus? quae plane obscura non est, quia ex ipsis membrorum officiis et usibus partium singularum quanta ui prouidentiae quidque factum sit, intellegere nobis licet.
Why, then, should anyone think it odious in us if we wish to examine and contemplate the design of our own body? It is plainly not obscure, since from the very functions of the members and the uses of the individual parts we may understand with how great a power of providence each thing has been made.
Notes and citation
Summary: Studying the design of our own body is legitimate, for its parts plainly reveal God's providence.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 1.16 (CSEL 27.1:7; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-1-16).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-1-16) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
Chapter 2
2.1CSEL 27.1:7
Dedit enim homini artifex ille noster ac parens deus sensum atque rationem, ut ex eo appareret nos ab eo esse generatos, quia ipse intellegentia, ipse sensus ac ratio est.
For God, that craftsman and parent of ours, gave man sense and reason, so that it might be evident from this that we are begotten by him, because he himself is intelligence, he himself is sense and reason.
Gen 1:27 (echo, low confidence)
Notes and citation
Summary: God gave humans sense and reason, showing that they are his offspring, since he himself is reason.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 2.1 (CSEL 27.1:7; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-2-1).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-2-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
2.2CSEL 27.1:7
ceteris animantibus quoniam rationalem istam uim non attribuit, quemadmodum tamen uita earum tutior esset, ante prouidit. omnes enim suis ex se pellibus texit, quo facilius possent uim pruinarum ac frigorum sustinere.
To the other living creatures, since he did not assign this rational power, he provided beforehand how their life might nonetheless be safer. For he covered them all with their own skins, so that they might more easily withstand the force of frosts and cold.
Notes and citation
Summary: Animals, lacking reason, were given natural coverings against the cold.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (misread letters in the digital text): pellibus terit → pellibus texit.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 2.2 (CSEL 27.1:7; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-2-2).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-2-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
2.3CSEL 27.1:7–8
Singulis autem generibus ad propulsandos impetus externos sua propria munimenta constituit, ut aut naturalibus telis repugnent fortioribus aut quae sunt inbecilliora, subtrahant se periculis pernicitate fugiendi aut quae simul et uiribus et celeritate indigent, astu se protegant aut latibulis saepiant.
And to the individual kinds he appointed their own defenses for repelling attacks from outside, so that either they resist the stronger with natural weapons, or those that are weaker withdraw themselves from dangers by speed of flight, or those that lack both strength and speed protect themselves by cunning or fence themselves in hiding places.
Notes and citation
Summary: Each kind of animal has its own defense: weapons, speed, cunning, or hiding.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (misread letter in the digital text): subtrahant ae periculis → subtrahant se periculis.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 2.3 (CSEL 27.1:7–8; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-2-3).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-2-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
2.4CSEL 27.1:8
itaque alia eorum uel plumis leuibus in sublime suspensa sunt uel suffulta ungulis uel instructa cornibus, quibusdam in ore arma sunt dentes aut in pedibus adunci ungues: nulli munimentum ad tutelam sui deest.
So some of them are either lifted on high by light feathers, or supported by hooves, or equipped with horns; some have weapons in the mouth, teeth, or hooked claws on their feet: none lacks a defense for its protection.
Notes and citation
Summary: Animals are armed with wings, hooves, horns, teeth, or claws.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray hyphen in the digital text): tutelam sui -deest → tutelam sui deest.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 2.4 (CSEL 27.1:8; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-2-4).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-2-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
2.5CSEL 27.1:8
si qua uero in praedam maioribus cedunt, ne tamen stirps eorum funditus interiret, aut in ea sunt religata regione, ubi maiora esse non possunt, aut acceperunt uberem generandi fecunditatem, ut et bestiis quae sanguine aluntur, uictus suppeteret ex illis et inlatam tamen cladem ad conseruationem generis multitudo ipsa superaret.
But if any fall as prey to larger ones, lest their stock nonetheless perish utterly, either they are confined to a region where larger ones cannot live, or they have received a rich fertility in breeding, so that both food may be supplied from them to the beasts that live on blood, and yet their very numbers may overcome the slaughter inflicted, for the preservation of the kind.
Notes and citation
Summary: Prey animals survive by living apart from predators or by breeding abundantly.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 2.5 (CSEL 27.1:8; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-2-5).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-2-5) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
2.6CSEL 27.1:8
hominem autem ratione concessa et uirtute sentiendi atque eloquendi data eorum quae ceteris animalibus attributa sunt, fecit expertem, quia sapientia reddere poterat quae illi naturae condicio denegasset: statuit enim nudum et inermem, quia et ingenio poterat armari et ratione uestiri.
But man, having been granted reason and given the power of perceiving and speaking, he made without the things that were assigned to the other animals, because wisdom could supply what the condition of nature had denied him: for he set him naked and unarmed, because he could both be armed by his intelligence and clothed by his reason.
Notes and citation
Summary: Man was made naked and unarmed because reason and intelligence supply what nature withheld.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 2.6 (CSEL 27.1:8; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-2-6).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-2-6) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
2.7CSEL 27.1:8
ea uero ipsa quae mutis data et homini denegata sunt, quam mirabiliter in homine ad pulchritudinem faciant, exprimi non potest. nam si homini ferinos dentes aut cornua aut ungues aut ungulas aut caudam aut uarii coloris pilos addidisset, quis non sentiat quam turpe animal esset futurum, sicut et muta, si nuda et inermia fingerentur?
But how wonderfully those very things that were given to the dumb animals and denied to man contribute to man's beauty cannot be expressed. For if he had added to man the teeth of beasts, or horns, or claws, or hooves, or a tail, or hair of varied color, who does not feel what an ugly animal he would have been, just as the dumb animals too would be if they were fashioned naked and unarmed?
Notes and citation
Summary: Animal weapons and coverings would make man ugly, just as animals would be ugly without them.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 2.7 (CSEL 27.1:8; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-2-7).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-2-7) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
2.8CSEL 27.1:8–9
quibus si detrahas uel naturalem sui corporis uestem uel ea quibus ex se armantur, nec speciosa poterunt esse nec tuta, ut mirabiliter, si utilitatem cogites, instructa, si speciem, ornata uideantur: adeo miro modo consentit utilitas cum decore.
If you take from them either the natural covering of their body or the things with which they are armed from themselves, they will be able to be neither handsome nor safe; so that they seem wonderfully equipped if you consider usefulness, and adorned if you consider appearance: so wonderfully does usefulness agree with beauty.
Notes and citation
Summary: In animals usefulness and beauty agree wonderfully.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 2.8 (CSEL 27.1:8–9; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-2-8).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-2-8) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
2.9CSEL 27.1:9
hominem uero quoniam aeternum animal atque inmortale fingebat, non forinsecus ut cetera, sed interius armauit nec munimentum eius in corpore, sed in animo posuit, quoniam superuacuum fuit, cum illi quod erat maximum tribuisset, corporalibus eum tegere munimentis, cum praesertim pulchritudinem humani corporis inpedirent.
But man, since he was fashioning him an eternal and immortal living being, he armed not outwardly like the rest but inwardly, and placed his defense not in the body but in the soul; for it was superfluous, since he had given him what was greatest, to cover him with bodily defenses, especially since they would hinder the beauty of the human body.
Notes and citation
Summary: Man, being immortal, was armed inwardly in the soul rather than with bodily defenses.
Topics: Eschatology
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 2.9 (CSEL 27.1:9; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-2-9).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-2-9) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
2.10CSEL 27.1:9
unde ego philosophorum qui Epicurum secuntur amentiam soleo mirari, qui naturae opera reprehendunt, ut ostendant nulla prouidentia instructum esse ac regi mundum, sed originem rerum insecabilibus ac solidis corporibus adsignant, quorum fortuitis concursionibus uniuersa nascantur et nata sint.
Hence I often wonder at the madness of the philosophers who follow Epicurus, who find fault with the works of nature so as to show that the world was not furnished and is not ruled by any providence, but assign the origin of things to indivisible and solid bodies, by whose chance collisions all things are born and have been born.
Notes and citation
Summary: The Epicureans foolishly criticize nature to deny providence and ascribe everything to chance collisions of atoms.
Extrabiblical texts: Epicurus (Epicurus (sayings and fragments); allusion)
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 2.10 (CSEL 27.1:9; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-2-10).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-2-10) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
2.11CSEL 27.1:9–10
praetereo quae ad ipsum mundum pertinentia uitio dant, in quo ridicule insaniunt: id sumo, quod ad rem de qua nunc agimus pertinet.
I pass over the faults they find in things belonging to the world itself, in which they rave ridiculously; I take up what belongs to the matter we are now dealing with.
Notes and citation
Summary: Lactantius passes over Epicurean criticisms of the cosmos to focus on the human body.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 2.11 (CSEL 27.1:9–10; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-2-11).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-2-11) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
Chapter 3
3.1CSEL 27.1:10
Queruntur hominem nimis inbecillum et fragilem nasci quam cetera nascantur animalia: quae ut sunt edita ex utero, protinus in pedes suos erigi et gestire discursibus statimque aeri tolerando idonea esse, quod in lucem naturalibus indumentis munita processerint, hominem contra nudum et inermem tamquam ex naufragio in huius uitae miserias proici et expelli, qui neque mouere se loco ubi effusus est possit nec alimentum lactis adpetere nec iniuriam temporis ferre.
They complain that man is born much weaker and more fragile than the other animals are born: that these, as soon as they have come forth from the womb, at once rise onto their feet and frisk about running, and are immediately fit to bear the air, because they have come forth into the light protected by natural coverings; whereas man, naked and unarmed, is cast out and thrown, as from a shipwreck, into the miseries of this life, unable either to move from the place where he has been poured out, or to seek the nourishment of milk, or to bear the harshness of the weather.
Notes and citation
Summary: Epicureans complain that humans are born helpless, like shipwrecked sailors, while animals are born ready for life.
- The complaint paraphrases Lucretius, On the Nature of Things 5.222–227 (the newborn child cast ashore like a shipwrecked sailor).
Extrabiblical texts: Lucretius, 5.222–227 (Lucretius, On the Nature of Things; allusion)
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.1 (CSEL 27.1:10; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-1).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.2CSEL 27.1:10
itaque naturam non matrem esse humani generis, sed nouercam, quae cum mutis tam liberaliter gesserit, hominem uero sic effuderit, ut inops et infirmus et omni auxilio indigens nihil aliud possit quam fragilitatis suae condicionem ploratu ac fletibus ominari, scilicet cui tantum in uita restet transire malorum.
So, they say, nature is not the mother of the human race but its stepmother, since she has dealt so generously with the dumb animals, but has poured out man in such a way that, helpless and weak and in need of every aid, he can do nothing but foretell the condition of his frailty with wailing and tears, as one, of course, for whom so much evil remains to pass through in life.
Notes and citation
Summary: They call nature a stepmother to humanity, whose infants can only wail at the evils ahead.
- The last clause echoes Lucretius 5.226–227. Nature as “stepmother” rather than mother is a commonplace (compare Pliny the Elder, Natural History 7.1).
Extrabiblical texts: Lucretius, 5.226–227 (Lucretius, On the Nature of Things; allusion)
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.2 (CSEL 27.1:10; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-2).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.3CSEL 27.1:10
quae cum dicunt, uehementer sapere creduntur, propterea quod unus quisque inconsiderate suae condicionis ingratus est, ego uero illos numquam tam desipere contendo quam cum haec locuntur.
When they say these things they are believed to be very wise, because each person thoughtlessly is ungrateful for his own condition; but I maintain that they are never so foolish as when they say this.
Notes and citation
Summary: Such complaints are thought wise but are in fact the height of folly and ingratitude.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.3 (CSEL 27.1:10; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-3).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.4CSEL 27.1:10–11
considerans enim condicionem rerum intellego nihil fieri aliter debuisse, ut non dicam potuisse, quia deus potest omnia, sed necesse est ut prouidentissima illa maiestas id effecerit quod erat melius et rectius.
For considering the condition of things, I understand that nothing ought to have been made otherwise, not to say could have been, since God can do all things; but it is necessary that that most provident majesty accomplished what was better and more right.
Notes and citation
Summary: God, able to do anything, necessarily made what was best.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.4 (CSEL 27.1:10–11; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-4).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.5CSEL 27.1:11
libet igitur interrogare istos diuinorum operum reprehensores quid in homine deesse, quia inbecillior nascitur, credant, num idcirco minus educentur homines, num minus ad summum robur aetatis prouehantur, num inbecillitas aut incrementum inpediat aut salutem, quoniam quae desunt ratio rependit?
I would like, then, to ask these critics of the divine works what they believe to be lacking in man because he is born weaker: are men therefore brought up less well? Are they carried forward less to the full strength of age? Does weakness hinder either growth or health, since reason makes up what is lacking?
Notes and citation
Summary: Human weakness at birth does not hinder growth or health, since reason compensates.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.5 (CSEL 27.1:11; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-5).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-5) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.6CSEL 27.1:11
at hominis inquiunt educatio maximis laboribus constat, pecudum scilicet condicio melior, quod eae cum fetum ediderint, non nisi pastus sui curam gerunt: ex quo efficitur ut uberibus sua sponte distentis alimentum lactis fetibus ministretur et id cogente natura sine matrum sollicitudine adpetant. quid?
“But,” they say, “the rearing of man is a matter of the greatest labors; the condition of the beasts is of course better, because when they have brought forth their young they take care only of their own feeding; from which it comes about that, their udders swelling of their own accord, the nourishment of milk is supplied to the young, and these seek it under the compulsion of nature without the mothers' concern.” What then?
Notes and citation
Summary: Opponents say animals rear their young without effort, unlike humans.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray digit in the digital text): 4at hominis → at hominis.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.6 (CSEL 27.1:11; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-6).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-6) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.7CSEL 27.1:11
aues, quarum ratio diuersa est, nonne maximos suscipiunt in educando labores, ut interdum aliquid humanae intellegentiae habere uideantur? nidos enim aut luto aedificant aut uirgultis et frondibus construunt, etiam ciborum expertes incubant ouis et quoniam fetus de suis corporibus alere non datum est, cibos conuehunt et totos dies in huiusmodi discursatione consumunt, noctibus uero defendunt fouent protegunt.
Do not birds, whose manner is different, undertake the greatest labors in rearing, so that they sometimes seem to have something of human intelligence? For they either build their nests of mud or construct them of twigs and leaves; they sit on the eggs even without food; and since they have not been granted to feed their young from their own bodies, they carry food to them and spend whole days in running to and fro of this kind, while at night they defend, warm, and protect them.
Notes and citation
Summary: Birds labor greatly to build nests, incubate, and feed their young.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.7 (CSEL 27.1:11; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-7).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-7) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.8CSEL 27.1:11
quid amplius homines facere possint nisi hoc solum fortasse, quod non expellunt adultos, sed perpetua necessitudine ac uinculo caritatis adiunctos habent?
What more can men do, except perhaps only this, that they do not drive them out when grown, but keep them joined to themselves by a lasting bond of kinship and the chain of love?
Notes and citation
Summary: Humans do no more than birds, except that they keep their children bound to them by lasting love.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.8 (CSEL 27.1:11; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-8).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-8) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.9CSEL 27.1:11–12
quid quod auium fetus multo fragilior est quam hominis, quia non ipsum animal edunt, sed id quod materni corporis fotu et calore tepefactum animal efficiat? quod tamen cum spiritu fuerit animatum, id uero inplume ac tenerum non modo uolandi, sed ambulandi quoque usu caret.
What of the fact that the offspring of birds is much more fragile than a man's, because they do not bring forth the animal itself, but that which, warmed by the brooding and heat of the mother's body, produces the animal? And even when that has been endowed with breath, being featherless and tender it lacks the use not only of flying but even of walking.
Notes and citation
Summary: Birds' young are even more fragile than human infants, being born first as eggs and then helpless.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.9 (CSEL 27.1:11–12; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-9).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-9) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.10CSEL 27.1:12
non ergo ineptissimus sit si quis putet male cum uolucribus egisse naturam primum quod bis nascantur, deinde quod tam infirmae, ut sint quaesitis per laborem cibis a parentibus nutriendae? sed illi fortiora eligunt, inbecilliora praetereunt.
Would not a man be most foolish, then, if he thought that nature had dealt badly with birds, first because they are born twice, then because they are so weak that they must be fed by their parents with food sought through labor? But they choose the stronger examples and pass over the weaker.
Notes and citation
Summary: No one blames nature for the frailty of birds; the critics pick only convenient examples.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.10 (CSEL 27.1:12; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-10).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-10) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.11CSEL 27.1:12
quaero igitur ab iis qui condicionem pecudum suae praeferunt, quid eligant, si deus iis deferat optionem, utrum malint, humanamne sapientiam cum inbecillitate an pecudum firmitatem cum illarum natura.
I ask, then, those who prefer the condition of the beasts to their own, what they would choose if God offered them the option: whether they would prefer human wisdom with weakness, or the strength of the beasts with their nature.
Notes and citation
Summary: Would the critics choose human wisdom with weakness, or animal strength with an animal nature?
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.11 (CSEL 27.1:12; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-11).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-11) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.12CSEL 27.1:12
scilicet non tam pecudes sunt, ut non malint uel fragiliorem multo quam nunc est dummodo humanam quam illam inrationabilem firmitatem. sed uidelicet prudentes uiri neque hominis rationem uolunt cum fragilitate neque mutorum firmitatem sine ratione.
Surely they are not such beasts that they would not prefer even a much more fragile condition than now, provided it be human, to that irrational strength. But, of course, these prudent men want neither man's reason with frailty nor the strength of the dumb animals without reason.
Notes and citation
Summary: No one would really choose irrational strength over human reason, but the critics want both at once.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.12 (CSEL 27.1:12; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-12).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-12) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.13CSEL 27.1:12–13
(quid) quod nihil est tam repugnans tamque contrarium, quod unum quodque animal aut ratio instruat necesse est aut condicio naturae? si naturalibus munimentis instruatur, superuacua ratio est. quid enim excogitabit? quid faciet? quid molietur? aut in quo lumen illud ingenii ostendet, cum ea quae possint esse rationis, ultro natura concedat?
What of the fact that nothing is so conflicting and so contrary as the idea that each animal must be equipped either by reason or by the condition of nature? If it is equipped with natural defenses, reason is superfluous. For what will it devise? What will it do? What will it undertake? Or in what will it show that light of intelligence, when nature of its own accord grants what could belong to reason?
Notes and citation
Summary: Reason and natural defenses exclude each other; if nature supplied everything, reason would have nothing to do.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.13 (CSEL 27.1:12–13; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-13).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-13) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.14CSEL 27.1:13
si autem ratione sit praeditum, quid opus erit saepimentis corporis, cum semel concessa ratio naturae munus possit inplere? quae quidem tantum ualet ad ornandum tuendumque hominem, ut nihil potuerit maius ac melius a deo dari.
But if it is endowed with reason, what need will there be of bodily fences, since reason, once granted, can fulfill the office of nature? Reason indeed avails so much for adorning and protecting man that nothing greater or better could have been given by God.
Notes and citation
Summary: Reason fulfills the work of natural defenses and is God's greatest gift.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.14 (CSEL 27.1:13; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-14).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-14) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.15CSEL 27.1:13
denique cum et corporis non magni homo et exiguarum uirium et ualitudinis sit infirmae, tamen quoniam id quod est maius accepit, et instructior est ceteris animalibus et ornatior.
In short, although man is not large of body, and of slight strength, and of weak health, yet because he has received what is greater, he is both better equipped and better adorned than the other animals.
Notes and citation
Summary: Though physically weak, man is better equipped than any animal because of reason.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.15 (CSEL 27.1:13; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-15).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-15) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.16CSEL 27.1:13
nam cum fragilis inbecillusque nascatur, tamen et a mutis omnibus tutus est et ea omnia quae firmiora nascuntur, etiamsi uim caeli fortiter patiuntur, ab homine tamen tuta esse non possunt.
For although he is born fragile and weak, yet he is safe from all the dumb animals, and all those that are born stronger, even if they bravely endure the force of the weather, cannot be safe from man.
Notes and citation
Summary: Man is safe from all animals, and none are safe from him.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.16 (CSEL 27.1:13; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-16).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-16) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.17CSEL 27.1:13
ita fit ut plus homini conferat ratio quam natura mutis, quoniam in illis neque magnitudo uirium neque firmitas corporis efficere potest quominus aut opprimantur a nobis aut nostrae subiecta sint potestati.
So it comes about that reason confers more on man than nature does on the dumb animals, since in them neither great strength nor firmness of body can prevent their being either overpowered by us or made subject to our power.
Gen 1:28 (echo, low confidence)
Notes and citation
Summary: Reason gives man more than nature gives animals, for all are subject to human power.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.17 (CSEL 27.1:13; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-17).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-17) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.18CSEL 27.1:13
potestne igitur aliquis cum uideat etiam boues lucas cum inmanissimis corporibus ac uiribus seruire homini, queri de opifice rerum deo, quod modicas uires, quod paruum corpus acceperit, nec beneficia in se diuina pro merito aestimat? quod est ingrati aut ut uerius loquamur, insani.
Can anyone, then, when he sees that even the Lucanian oxen, with their enormous bodies and strength, serve man, complain against God, the maker of things, because he has received moderate strength and a small body, and not value the divine benefits toward himself according to their worth? That is the part of an ungrateful man, or, to speak more truly, of a madman.
Notes and citation
Summary: Seeing even elephants serve man, no one should complain of a small body; to do so is ingratitude or madness.
- “Lucanian oxen” (boues lucae) was the old Roman name for elephants.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.18 (CSEL 27.1:13; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-18).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-18) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.19CSEL 27.1:13
Plato ut hos credo ingratos refelleret, naturae gratias egit, quod homo natus esset.
Plato, I believe to refute these ungrateful men, gave thanks to nature that he had been born a human being.
Notes and citation
Summary: Plato gave thanks that he was born a human being.
- The saying is attributed to Plato by later writers (e.g. Plutarch, Marius 46.1); it is not found in his dialogues.
Extrabiblical texts: Plato (Plato (works); allusion)
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.19 (CSEL 27.1:13; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-19).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-19) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.20CSEL 27.1:13–14
quanto magis melius et sanius, qui sensit condicionem hominis esse meliorem, quam isti qui se pecudes natos maluerunt! quos si deus in ea forte conuerterit animalia quorum sortem praeferunt suae, iam profecto cupiant remigrare magnisque clamoribus condicionem pristinam flagitent, quia non est tanti robur ac firmitas corporis, ut officio linguae careas, aut auium per aerem libera discursatio, ut manibus indigeas. plus enim manus praestant quam leuitas ususque pinnarum, plus lingua quam totius corporis fortitudo.
How much better and saner was he who perceived that man's condition is better, than these who would rather have been born beasts! If God were perhaps to change them into those animals whose lot they prefer to their own, they would surely at once want to move back and would demand their former condition with loud cries, because strength and firmness of body are not worth so much that you should lack the use of the tongue, nor the free coursing of birds through the air so much that you should lack hands. For hands afford more than the lightness and use of wings, the tongue more than the strength of the whole body.
Notes and citation
Summary: Those who envy animals would beg to be human again, since hands and speech are worth more than wings or strength.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.20 (CSEL 27.1:13–14; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-20).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-20) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
3.21CSEL 27.1:14
quae igitur amentia est ea praeferre quae si data sint, accipere detrectes?
What madness it is, then, to prefer things which, if they were given, you would refuse to accept!
Notes and citation
Summary: It is madness to prefer what one would refuse if offered.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 3.21 (CSEL 27.1:14; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-3-21).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-3-21) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
Chapter 4
4.1CSEL 27.1:14
Idem queruntur hominem morbis et inmaturae morti esse subiectum. indignantur uidelicet non deos esse se natos. minime, inquiunt sed ex hoc ostendimus hominem nulla prouidentia esse factum, quod aliter fieri debuit.
The same men complain that man is subject to diseases and untimely death. They are indignant, evidently, that they were not born gods. “Not at all,” they say, “but from this we show that man was made by no providence, because it ought to have been done otherwise.”
Notes and citation
Summary: Epicureans argue from disease and early death that humans were not made by providence.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.1 (CSEL 27.1:14; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-1).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.2CSEL 27.1:14
quid si ostendo id ipsum magna ratione prouisum esse, ut morbis uexari posset et uita saepe in medio cursus sui spatio rumperetur? cum enim deus animal quod fecerat sua sponte ad mortem transire cognouisset, ut mortem ipsam, quae est dissolutio naturae, capere posset, dedit ei fragilitatem, quae morti aditum ad dissoluendum animal inueniret.
What if I show that this very thing was provided with great reason: that he could be troubled by diseases and that his life should often be broken off in the middle of its course? For since God knew that the living being he had made would pass to death of its own accord, he gave it frailty, so that it might be capable of death itself, which is the dissolution of nature, and so that death might find an entrance for dissolving the living being.
Notes and citation
Summary: God made humans frail so that they could die, since mortality requires a body that can be dissolved.
Topics: Eschatology
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.2 (CSEL 27.1:14; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-2).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.3CSEL 27.1:14–15
nam si eius roboris fieret, ut ad eum morbus et aegritudo adire non posset, ne mors quidem posset, quoniam mors sequella morborum est. inmatura uero mors quomodo abesset ab eo cui esset constituta matura? nempe nullum hominem mori uolunt nisi cum centesimum aetatis conpleuerit annum.
For if he were made of such strength that disease and sickness could not reach him, neither could death, since death is the consequence of diseases. And how could untimely death be absent from one for whom timely death had been appointed? Plainly they want no man to die until he has completed his hundredth year of age.
Notes and citation
Summary: A being immune to disease would be immune to death; the critics want everyone to live to a hundred.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.3 (CSEL 27.1:14–15; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-3).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.4CSEL 27.1:15
quomodo illis in tanta repugnantia rerum poterit ratio constare? ut enim ante annos centum mori quisque non possit, aliquid illi roboris quod sit inmortale tribuendum est: quo concesso necesse est condicionem mortis excludi.
How can their reasoning hold together in so great a contradiction? For in order that no one could die before a hundred years, some strength that is immortal must be granted him; and once that is granted, the condition of death must necessarily be excluded.
Notes and citation
Summary: Guaranteeing a long life would require immortal strength, which would exclude death altogether.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.4 (CSEL 27.1:15; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-4).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.5CSEL 27.1:15
id autem ipsum cuiusmodi potest esse quod hominem contra morbos et ictus extrarios solidum atque inexpugnabilem faciat? cum enim constet ex ossibus et neruis et uisceribus et sanguine, quid horum potest esse tam firmum, ut fragilitatem repellat ac mortem?
But what kind of thing could that be which would make man solid and unassailable against diseases and blows from outside? For since he consists of bones and sinews and inner organs and blood, which of these can be so firm as to repel frailty and death?
Notes and citation
Summary: Nothing in the human body of bone, sinew, organs, and blood could be proof against frailty and death.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.5 (CSEL 27.1:15; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-5).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-5) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.6CSEL 27.1:15
ut igitur homo indissolubilis sit ante id tempus quod illi putant oportuisse constitui, ex qua ei materia corpus attribuent? fragilia sunt omnia quae uideri ac tangi possunt. superest ut aliquid ex caelo petant, quoniam in terra nihil est quod non sit infirmum.
In order, then, that man might be indissoluble before the time which they think ought to have been appointed for him, from what matter will they give him a body? All things that can be seen and touched are fragile. It remains that they seek something from heaven, since on earth there is nothing that is not weak.
Notes and citation
Summary: Every visible, tangible matter is fragile; an unbreakable body would have to come from heaven.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.6 (CSEL 27.1:15; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-6).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-6) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.7CSEL 27.1:15
cum ergo sic homo formandus esset a deo ut mortalis esset aliquando, res ipsa exigebat ut terreno et fragili corpore fingeretur. necesse est igitur ut mortem recipiat quandolibet, quoniam corporalis est; corpus enim quodlibet solubile atque mortale est.
Since, then, man was to be formed by God so as to be mortal at some time, the matter itself required that he be fashioned with an earthly and fragile body. It is necessary, therefore, that he admit death at any time, since he is bodily; for any body whatever is dissoluble and mortal.
Gen 2:7 (echo, low confidence)
Notes and citation
Summary: Being mortal and bodily, man had to have an earthly, fragile body open to death at any time.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.7 (CSEL 27.1:15; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-7).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-7) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.8CSEL 27.1:15–16
stultissimi ergo, qui de morte inmatura queruntur, quoniam naturae condicio locum illi facit. ita consequens erit ut morbis quoque subiectus sit: neque enim patitur natura ut abesse possit infirmitas ab eo corpore quod aliquando soluendum est.
They are most foolish, then, who complain about untimely death, since the condition of nature makes room for it. So it will follow that he is also subject to diseases; for nature does not allow weakness to be absent from that body which must at some time be dissolved.
Notes and citation
Summary: Since the body must one day dissolve, disease and early death are part of its nature.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.8 (CSEL 27.1:15–16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-8).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-8) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.9CSEL 27.1:16
sed putemus fieri posse quemadmodum uolunt, ut homines ea condicione nascantur, ne quis morbo mortiue subiectus sit, nisi peracto aetatis suae spatio ad ultimam processerit senectutem:
But let us suppose it could happen as they wish, that men were born on the condition that no one should be subject to disease or death unless, having completed the span of his life, he had reached extreme old age:
Notes and citation
Summary: Suppose, as the critics wish, that no one could die before old age.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.9 (CSEL 27.1:16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-9).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-9) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.10CSEL 27.1:16
non igitur uident, si ita sit constitutum, quid sequatur, omni utique cetero tempore mori nullo modo posse? sed si prohiberi ab altero uictu potest, mori poterit. res igitur exigit ut homini qui ante certam diem mori non potest, ciborum alimentis, quia subtrahi possunt, opus non sit. <sed> si opus cibo non erit, iam non homo ille, sed deus fiet. ergo, ut superius dixi, qui de fragilitate hominis queruntur, id potissimum queruntur, quod non inmortales sempiternique sint nati.
do they not see, then, what would follow if it were so arranged: that he could in no way die at any other time at all? But if he can be kept from food by another, he will be able to die. The matter requires, then, that a man who cannot die before a fixed day should have no need of the nourishment of foods, since they can be withdrawn. But if he has no need of food, he will then be not a man but a god. So, as I said above, those who complain of man's frailty complain above all of this: that they were not born immortal and everlasting.
Notes and citation
Summary: A man who could not die before old age would need no food and would be a god; the critics really complain that they are not immortal.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (misread bracket in the digital text; stray period in the digital text): mori non potest. ciborum → mori non potest, ciborum; <sed) si → <sed> si.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.10 (CSEL 27.1:16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-10).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-10) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.11CSEL 27.1:16
nemo nisi senex mori debet. atquin mortalitas non potest cum inmortalitate coniungi. si enim mortalis est in senectute, inmortalis esse in adulescentia non potest nec est ab eo condicio mortis aliena qui quandoque moriturus est, nec ulla inmortalitas est cui sit terminus constitutus.
“No one should die except an old man.” But mortality cannot be joined with immortality. For if he is mortal in old age, he cannot be immortal in youth; nor is the condition of death foreign to him who is to die at some time; nor is there any immortality for which an end has been fixed.
Notes and citation
Summary: Mortality and immortality cannot be combined; one who will die at all is mortal throughout life.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray period in the digital text): in senectute. inmortalis → in senectute, inmortalis.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.11 (CSEL 27.1:16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-11).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-11) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.12CSEL 27.1:16–17
ita fit ut et inmortalitas exclusa in perpetuum et ad tempus recepta mortalitas hominem constituat in ea condicione, ut sit in qualibet aetate mortalis. quadrat igitur necessitas undique nec debuisse fieri aliter nec fas fuisse.
So it comes about that immortality, excluded forever, and mortality, admitted for a time, place man in this condition: that he is mortal at any age. Necessity, then, fits on every side: it neither ought to have been done otherwise, nor would it have been right.
Notes and citation
Summary: Man is necessarily mortal at every age, and it could not rightly have been otherwise.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.12 (CSEL 27.1:16–17; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-12).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-12) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.13CSEL 27.1:17
sed isti rationem sequentium non uident, quia semel errauerunt in ipsa summa, exclusa enim de rebus humanis diuina prouidentia necessario sequebatur ut omnia sua sponte sint nata. hinc inuenerunt illas minutorum seminum plagas et concursiones fortuitas, quia rerum originem non uidebant.
But these men do not see the consequences, because they have gone wrong once in the main point itself. For when divine providence had been excluded from human affairs, it necessarily followed that all things were born of their own accord. Hence they invented those blows and chance collisions of tiny seeds, because they did not see the origin of things.
Notes and citation
Summary: Having denied providence, the Epicureans had to explain everything by chance collisions of atoms.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.13 (CSEL 27.1:17; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-13).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-13) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.14CSEL 27.1:17
in quas se angustias cum coniecissent, iam cogebat eos necessitas existimare animas cum corporibus nasci et item cum corporibus extingui: adsumpserant enim nihil fieri mente diuina. quod ipsum non aliter probare poterant quam si ostenderent esse aliqua in quibus uideretur prouidentiae ratio claudicare.
Having thrown themselves into these straits, necessity now forced them to think that souls are born with bodies and likewise extinguished with bodies; for they had assumed that nothing is done by the divine mind. And this very thing they could not prove otherwise than by showing that there were some things in which the design of providence seemed to limp.
Notes and citation
Summary: Denying providence forced them to hold that souls die with bodies, and to look for supposed flaws in creation.
Topics: Eschatology
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.14 (CSEL 27.1:17; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-14).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-14) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.15CSEL 27.1:17
reprehenderunt igitur ea in quibus uel maxime diuinitatem suam prouidentia mirabiliter expressit, ut illa quae rettuli de morbis et inmatura morte, cum debuerint cogitare his adsumptis quid necessario sequeretur.
So they found fault with those very things in which providence has most wonderfully expressed its divinity, such as those I have mentioned about diseases and untimely death, when they ought to have considered, once these were granted, what would necessarily follow.
Notes and citation
Summary: They criticized the very features that best show providence, without thinking through the consequences.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.15 (CSEL 27.1:17; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-15).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-15) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.16CSEL 27.1:17
secuntur autem illa quae dixi: si morbum non reciperet, neque tectis neque uestibus indigeret. quid enim uentos aut imbres aut frigora metueret, quorum uis in eo est ut morbos adferant? idcirco enim accepit sapientiam, ut aduersus nocentia fragilitatem suam muniat.
And what follows is what I have said: if he did not admit disease, he would need neither houses nor clothes. For why should he fear winds or rains or cold, whose force lies in bringing diseases? For this reason he received wisdom: to fortify his frailty against harmful things.
Notes and citation
Summary: Without liability to disease man would need no shelter or clothing; wisdom was given to protect his frailty.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.16 (CSEL 27.1:17; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-16).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-16) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.17CSEL 27.1:17
sequitur <quod> necesse est, ut quoniam retinendae rationis causa morbos capit, etiam mortem semper accipiat, quia is ad quem mors non uenit, firmus sit necesse est. infirmitas autem habet in se mortis condicionem, firmitas uero ubi fuerit, nec senectus locum potest habere nec mors, quae sequitur senectutem.
It follows necessarily that, since for the sake of retaining reason he admits diseases, he should also always admit death, because he to whom death does not come must be firm. But weakness has in itself the condition of death; whereas where firmness is, neither old age can have a place, nor death, which follows old age.
Notes and citation
Summary: Because reason requires frailty, frailty brings death; only an invulnerable being would escape old age and death.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray period in the digital text): firmitas. uero ubi → firmitas uero ubi.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.17 (CSEL 27.1:17; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-17).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-17) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.18CSEL 27.1:17–18
praeterea si mors certae constituta esset aetati, fieret homo insolentissimus et humanitate omni careret. nam fere iura omnia humanitatis, quibus inter nos cohaeremus, ex metu et conscientia fragilitatis oriuntur.
Besides, if death had been fixed for a certain age, man would become most insolent and would lack all humanity. For almost all the laws of humanity, by which we hold together among ourselves, arise from fear and the awareness of frailty.
Notes and citation
Summary: If death came only at a fixed age, people would become arrogant and inhuman, since social bonds arise from awareness of frailty.
Topics: Ethics
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.18 (CSEL 27.1:17–18; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-18).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-18) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.19CSEL 27.1:18
denique inbecilliora et timidiora quaeque animalia congregantur, ut quoniam uiribus tueri se nequeunt, multitudine tueantur, fortiora uero solitudines adpetunt, quoniam robore uiribusque confidunt.
In short, all the weaker and more timid animals herd together, so that, since they cannot protect themselves by strength, they may protect themselves by numbers; while the stronger seek solitudes, since they trust in their might and strength.
Notes and citation
Summary: Weak animals herd together for protection; strong ones live alone.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.19 (CSEL 27.1:18; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-19).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-19) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.20CSEL 27.1:18
homo quoque si eodem modo haberet ad propulsanda pericula suppetens robur nec ullius alterius auxilio indigeret, quae societas esset, quae reuerentia inter se, quis ordo, quae ratio, quae humanitas? aut quid esset tetrius homine, quid efferatius, quid inmanius?
Man too, if he had in the same way sufficient strength to repel dangers and needed no one else's help, what society would there be, what reverence among one another, what order, what reason, what humanity? Or what would be more hideous than man, what more savage, what more monstrous?
Notes and citation
Summary: If humans needed no help from one another, there would be no society, order, or humanity.
Topics: Ethics
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.20 (CSEL 27.1:18; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-20).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-20) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.21CSEL 27.1:18
sed quoniam inbecillus est nec per se potest sine homine uiuere, societatem adpetit, ut uita communis et ornatior fiat et tutior.
But since he is weak and cannot live by himself without man, he seeks society, so that the common life may become both more refined and safer.
Notes and citation
Summary: Human weakness leads people to form society for a better and safer life.
Topics: Ethics
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.21 (CSEL 27.1:18; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-21).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-21) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.22CSEL 27.1:18
uides igitur omnem hominis rationem in eo uel maxime stare, quod nudus fragilisque nascitur, quod morbis adficitur, quod inmatura morte multatur. quae si homini detrahantur, rationem quoque ac sapientiam detrahi necesse est.
You see, then, that the whole design of man rests above all in this: that he is born naked and fragile, that he is afflicted by diseases, that he is punished with untimely death. If these are taken from man, reason and wisdom must also be taken away.
Notes and citation
Summary: Human reason and wisdom depend on man's nakedness, frailty, disease, and mortality.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.22 (CSEL 27.1:18; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-22).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-22) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.23CSEL 27.1:18
sed nimis diu de rebus apertissimis disputo, cum sit liquidum nihil sine prouidentia nec factum esse umquam nec fieri potuisse. de cuius operibus uniuersis si nunc libeat disputare per ordinem, infinita materia est.
But I am arguing too long about very plain matters, since it is clear that nothing has ever been made or could have been made without providence. If I wished now to discuss all its works in order, the subject is infinite.
Notes and citation
Summary: It is plain that nothing exists without providence, whose works are too many to discuss.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.23 (CSEL 27.1:18; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-23).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-23) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
4.24CSEL 27.1:18–19
sed ego de uno corpore hominis tantum institui dicere, ut in eo diuinae prouidentiae potestatem quanta fuerit ostendam, his dumtaxat in rebus, quae sunt conprehensibiles et apertae: nam illa quae sunt animi, nec subici oculis nec conprehendi queunt. nunc de ipso uase hominis loquimur quod uidemus.
But I have undertaken to speak only of the one body of man, so as to show in it how great the power of divine providence has been, at least in those things which can be grasped and are plain; for the things that belong to the soul can neither be placed before the eyes nor grasped. Now we speak of the very vessel of man, which we see.
Notes and citation
Summary: Lactantius will limit himself to the visible human body, the vessel of the soul, to show God's providence.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 4.24 (CSEL 27.1:18–19; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-4-24).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-4-24) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
Chapter 5
5.1CSEL 27.1:19
In principio cum deus fingeret animalia, noluit ea in rotundam formae speciem conglobare atque colligere, ut et moueri ad ambulandum et flectere se in quamlibet partem facile possent, sed ex ipsa corporis summa produxit caput. item produxit quaedam membra longius, quae uocantur pedes, ut alternis motibus solo fixa perducerent animal quo mens tulisset aut quo petendi cibi necessitas prouocasset.
In the beginning, when God was fashioning the living creatures, he did not want to roll them up and gather them into a round shape, so that they could easily both move to walk and bend themselves in any direction; but from the very top of the body he drew out the head. Likewise he drew out certain members to a greater length, which are called feet, so that, planted on the ground with alternating movements, they might carry the living creature wherever the mind had led or the need of seeking food had called it.
Gen 1:24 (echo, low confidence)
Notes and citation
Summary: God shaped animals not as spheres but with a head and feet so they could move and seek food.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.1 (CSEL 27.1:19; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-1).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.2CSEL 27.1:19
ex ipso autem uasculo corporis quattuor fecit extantia, bina posterius, quae sunt in omnibus pedes, item bina capiti et collo proxima, quae uarios usus animantibus praebent. in pecudibus enim ac feris pedes sunt posterioribus similes, in homine autem manus, quae non ad ambulandum, sed ad faciendum tenendumque sunt natae.
And from the little vessel of the body itself he made four projections: two behind, which in all creatures are feet; and likewise two next to the head and neck, which supply various uses to living creatures. For in cattle and wild beasts they are feet like the hind ones, but in man they are hands, which were made not for walking but for making and holding.
Notes and citation
Summary: Animals have four limbs; in beasts the front pair are feet, in man they are hands for making and holding.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.2 (CSEL 27.1:19; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-2).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.3CSEL 27.1:19
est et tertium genus, in quo priora illa neque pedes neque manus sunt, sed alae, in quibus pinnae per ordinem fixae uolandi exhibent usum. ita una fictio diuersas species et usus habet.
There is also a third kind, in which those front limbs are neither feet nor hands but wings, in which feathers set in order provide the use of flying. So one design has different forms and uses.
Notes and citation
Summary: In birds the front limbs are wings, so one design serves different uses.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.3 (CSEL 27.1:19; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-3).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.4CSEL 27.1:19
atque ut ipsam corporis crassitudinem firmiter conprehenderet, maioribus et breuibus ossibus inuicem conligatis quasi carinam conpegit quam nos dicimus spinam eamque noluit ex uno perpetuoque osse formare, ne gradiendi flectendique se facultatem animal non haberet.
And in order to hold the very bulk of the body firmly together, he fitted together, as it were, a keel of larger and short bones bound to one another, which we call the spine; and he did not want to form it of one continuous bone, lest the living creature should lack the ability to walk and to bend itself.
Notes and citation
Summary: The spine is a keel of many jointed bones, allowing walking and bending.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (misread letters in the digital text): corpons → corporis.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.4 (CSEL 27.1:19; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-4).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.5CSEL 27.1:19–20
ex eius parte quasi media costas id est transuersa et plana ossa porrexit in diuersum, quibus clementer curuatis et in se uelut in circulum paene conductis interna uiscera contegantur, ut ea quae molliora et minus ualida fieri opus erat, illius solidae cratis amplexu possent esse munita.
From about its middle part he stretched out ribs, that is, transverse and flat bones, in opposite directions, gently curved and drawn together almost into a circle, by which the inner organs are covered, so that those parts which needed to be softer and less strong might be protected by the embrace of that solid framework.
Notes and citation
Summary: The curved ribs form a protective frame around the soft inner organs.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.5 (CSEL 27.1:19–20; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-5).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-5) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.6CSEL 27.1:20
in summo uero constructionis eius quam similem nauali carinae diximus, caput conlocauit, in quo esset regimen totius animantis, datumque illi hoc nomen est, ut quidem Varro ad Ciceronem scribit, quod hinc capiant initium sensus ac nerui.
And at the top of that structure, which we have said is like a ship's keel, he placed the head, in which the government of the whole living creature was to be; and this name was given to it, as Varro indeed writes to Cicero, because the senses and nerves take their beginning (capiant) from it.
Notes and citation
Summary: The head, seat of government of the body, is named caput, according to Varro, because the senses begin there.
- The etymology is from Varro, On the Latin Language 5.73 (a work dedicated to Cicero); it plays on caput (“head”) and capere (“take”).
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray period in the digital text): carinae diximus. caput → carinae diximus, caput.
Extrabiblical texts: Varro, Ling. 5.73 (Varro; allusion)
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.6 (CSEL 27.1:20; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-6).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-6) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.7CSEL 27.1:20
ea uero quae diximus a corpore uel ambulandi uel faciendi uel uolandi causa esse producta, neque nimium longis propter celerem mobilitatem neque nimium breuibus propter firmitatem, sed et paucis et magnis ossibus constare uoluit.
And the limbs which we have said were drawn out from the body for the sake of walking, or making, or flying, he willed to consist neither of too long bones, for the sake of quick mobility, nor of too short ones, for the sake of firmness, but of few and large bones.
Notes and citation
Summary: The limbs are built of a few large bones, balancing mobility and strength.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.7 (CSEL 27.1:20; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-7).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-7) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.8CSEL 27.1:20
aut enim bina sunt ut in homine aut <qua>terna ut in quadrupede: quae tamen non fecit solida, ne in gradiendo pigritia et grauitas retardaret, sed cauata et ad uigorem corporis conseruandum medullis intrinsecus plena. eaque rursus non aequaliter porrecta finiuit, sed summas eorum partes nodis crassioribus conglobauit, ut et substringi neruis facilius et uerti tutius possent, unde sunt uertibula nominata.
For they are either two, as in man, or four, as in the quadruped; yet he did not make them solid, lest sluggishness and weight should slow them in walking, but hollow, and filled within with marrow for preserving the vigor of the body. And again he did not finish them stretched out evenly, but rounded their ends into thicker knobs, so that they could both be more easily bound with sinews and turned more safely; whence they are named vertebrae (vertibula).
Notes and citation
Summary: Limb bones are hollow and filled with marrow, with rounded ends so they can be bound by sinews and turn safely.
- The etymology links vertibula (joints) with vertere (“turn”). Quaterna (“four”) is an editorial supplement in angle brackets in the digital text.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray period in the digital text): neruis facilius. et uerti → neruis facilius et uerti.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.8 (CSEL 27.1:20; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-8).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-8) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.9CSEL 27.1:20–21
eos nodos firmiter solidatos leni quodam operculo texit, quod dicitur cartilago, scilicet ut sine attritu et sine sensu doloris aliquo flecterentur. eosdem tamen non in unum modum informauit. alios enim fecit simplices et in orbem rotundos,
He covered those knobs, firmly solidified, with a certain smooth lid, which is called cartilage, so that they might bend without friction and without any sense of pain. Yet he did not shape them all in one way. For some he made simple and round like a ball,
Notes and citation
Summary: The joints are covered with cartilage for painless movement and shaped differently for different purposes.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.9 (CSEL 27.1:20–21; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-9).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-9) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.10CSEL 27.1:21
in iis dumtaxat articulis in quibus moueri membra in omnes partes oportebat, ut in scapulis, quoniam manus utrolibet agitari et contorqueri necessarium est, alios autem latos et aequales et in unam partem rotundos et in iis utique locis ubi tantummodo curuari membra oportebat, ut in genibus et cubitis et manibus ipsis.
in those joints only in which the limbs needed to move in every direction, as at the shoulders, since the hands must be moved and turned in either direction; but others broad and even and rounded on one side, and that in those places where the limbs needed only to bend, as at the knees and elbows and the hands themselves.
Notes and citation
Summary: Ball joints at the shoulders allow movement in all directions; hinge joints at knees, elbows, and hands bend one way.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.10 (CSEL 27.1:21; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-10).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-10) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.11CSEL 27.1:21
nam sicut manus ex eo loco unde oriuntur ubique uersus moueri speciosum simul et utile fuit, sic profecto, si hoc idem etiam cubitis accideret, et superuacuus esset eiusmodi motus et turpis.
For just as it was both becoming and useful for the hands to move in every direction from the place where they spring, so surely, if the same thing happened to the elbows too, such movement would be both superfluous and ugly.
Notes and citation
Summary: Movement in all directions suits the shoulder but would be useless and ugly at the elbow.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.11 (CSEL 27.1:21; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-11).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-11) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.12CSEL 27.1:21
iam enim manus amissa dignitate quam nunc habet mobilitate nimia proboscidi similis uideretur essetque homo plane anguimanus, quod genus in illa inmanissima belua mirabiliter effectum est.
For then the hand, having lost the dignity it now has, would look like a trunk because of excessive mobility, and man would be plainly snake-handed, a kind of thing wonderfully produced in that most enormous beast.
Notes and citation
Summary: Too flexible an arm would look like an elephant's trunk.
- “Snake-handed” (anguimanus) is a poetic word for the elephant (Lucretius 2.537, 5.1303).
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.12 (CSEL 27.1:21; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-12).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-12) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
5.13CSEL 27.1:21–22
deus enim qui prouidentiam et potestatem suam multarum rerum mirabili uarietate uoluit ostendere, quoniam caput eius animalis non tam longe porrexerat, ut terram posset ore contingere, quod erat futurum horribile atque tetrum, et quia os ipsum profusis dentibus sic armauerat, ut etiamsi contingeret, pascendi tamen facultatem dentes adimerent, produxit inter eos a summa fronte molle ac flexibile membrum quo prendere, quo tenere quodlibet posset, ne rationem uictus capiendi uel dentium prominens magnitudo uel ceruicis breuitas inpediret.
For God, who willed to show his providence and power by a wonderful variety of many things, since he had not stretched out the head of that animal so far that it could touch the ground with its mouth, which would have been horrible and hideous, and because he had so armed the mouth itself with protruding teeth that, even if it did touch, the teeth would take away the ability to feed, drew out between them, from the top of the forehead, a soft and flexible member with which it could grasp and hold anything, lest either the projecting size of its teeth or the shortness of its neck should hinder its means of taking food.
Notes and citation
Summary: God gave the elephant a trunk because its short neck and tusks would otherwise keep it from feeding.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 5.13 (CSEL 27.1:21–22; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-5-13).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-5-13) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
Chapter 6
6.1CSEL 27.1:22
Non possum hoc loco teneri quominus Epicuri stultitiam rursum coarguam: illius enim sunt omnia quae delirat Lucretius. qui ut ostenderet animalia non artificio aliquo diuinae mentis, sed, ut solet, fortuito nata esse, dixit in principio mundi alias quasdam innumerabiles animantes miranda specie ac magnitudine fuisse natas, sed eas permanere non potuisse, quod illas aut sumendi cibi facultas aut coeundi generandique ratio defecisset.
I cannot be kept at this point from refuting the folly of Epicurus again; for all the ravings of Lucretius are his. He, to show that animals were born not by any craftsmanship of the divine mind but, as he usually says, by chance, said that at the beginning of the world certain other countless living creatures of wonderful shape and size were born, but that they could not survive, because either the ability to take food or the means of coupling and begetting had failed them.
Notes and citation
Summary: Lucretius, following Epicurus, claimed that countless monstrous creatures arose by chance and perished because they could not feed or breed.
- The reference is Lucretius, On the Nature of Things 5.837–854.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray period in the digital text): diuinae. mentis → diuinae mentis.
Extrabiblical texts: Lucretius, 5.837–854 (Lucretius, On the Nature of Things; allusion); Epicurus (Epicurus (sayings and fragments); allusion)
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.1 (CSEL 27.1:22; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-1).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-1) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.2CSEL 27.1:22
uidelicet ut atomis suis locum faceret, diuinam prouidentiam uoluit excludere. sed cum uideret in omnibus quae spirant mirabilem prouidentiae inesse rationem, quae, malum, uanitas erat dicere fuisse animalia prodigiosa in quibus ratio cessaret?
Evidently, in order to make room for his atoms, he wanted to exclude divine providence. But since he saw that in all things that breathe there is a wonderful design of providence, what vanity was it, confound it, to say that there were monstrous animals in which design was lacking?
Notes and citation
Summary: To make room for atoms Epicurus denied providence, yet absurdly invented animals lacking design.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.2 (CSEL 27.1:22; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-2).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-2) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.3CSEL 27.1:22
quoniam igitur omnia quae uidemus cum ratione nata sunt - id enim ipsum, nasci, efficere nisi ratio non potest —, manifestum est nihil omnino rationis expers potuisse generari.
Since, then, all the things that we see were born with design (for nothing but design can bring about the very fact of being born), it is plain that nothing at all could have been produced without design.
Notes and citation
Summary: Everything that exists was made with design, so nothing could arise without it.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.3 (CSEL 27.1:22; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-3).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-3) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.4CSEL 27.1:22
ante enim prouisum est in singulis quibusque fingendis quatenus et ministerio membrorum ad necessaria uitae uterentur et quatenus adiugatis corporibus elata suboles uniuersas generatim conseruaret animantes.
For it was provided beforehand, in fashioning each and every one, how far they might use the service of their members for the necessities of life, and how far, their bodies being joined, the offspring brought forth might preserve all living creatures kind by kind.
Gen 1:24 (echo, low confidence)
Notes and citation
Summary: In making each creature, God provided for both its life and its reproduction.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (misread letter in the digital text): in singulis quibusque tingendis → in singulis quibusque fingendis.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.4 (CSEL 27.1:22; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-4).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-4) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.5CSEL 27.1:22
nam si peritus architectus cum magnum aliquod aedificium facere constituit, primo omnium cogitat quae summa perfecti aedificii futura sit, et ante emetitur quem locum leue pondus expectet, ubi magni oneris statura sit moles, quae columnarum interualla, qui aut ubi aquarum cadentium decursus et exitus et recepta-
For if a skilled architect, when he has decided to build some great building, first of all considers what the whole of the finished building will be, and measures beforehand what place awaits a light weight, where a mass of great load is to stand, what the intervals of the columns will be, what or where the courses and outlets and receptacles
Notes and citation
Summary: A skilled architect plans every part of a building before beginning.
- The sentence continues into 6.6; the word “receptacles” (receptacula) is split between the two sections in the digital text.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.5 (CSEL 27.1:22; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-5).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-5) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.6CSEL 27.1:22–23
cula, haec, inquam, prius prouidet, ut quaecumque sunt perfecto iam operi necessaria, cum ipsis fundamentis pariter ordiatur, cur deum quisquam putet in machinandis animalibus non ante prouidisse quae ad uiuendum necessaria essent quam uitam ipsam daret? quae utique constare non posset, nisi prius effecta essent quibus constat.
of falling waters will be: these things, I say, he provides beforehand, so that whatever is necessary to the work when finished may be begun together with the very foundations; why should anyone think that God, in contriving living creatures, did not provide beforehand the things necessary for living before he gave life itself? It could certainly not exist unless the things by which it exists had first been made.
Notes and citation
Summary: Just as an architect plans ahead, God provided everything needed for life before giving life.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (stray question mark in the digital text): quaecumque sunt? perfecto → quaecumque sunt perfecto.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.6 (CSEL 27.1:22–23; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-6).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-6) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.7CSEL 27.1:23
uidebat igitur Epicurus in corporibus animalium diuinae rationis sollertiam, sed ut efficeret quod ante inprudenter adsumpserat, adiecit aliud deliramentum superiori congruens.
So Epicurus saw the skill of the divine design in the bodies of living creatures; but in order to accomplish what he had rashly assumed before, he added another piece of raving consistent with the first.
Notes and citation
Summary: Seeing design in bodies, Epicurus added a further absurdity to protect his theory.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.7 (CSEL 27.1:23; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-7).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-7) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.8CSEL 27.1:23
dixit enim neque oculos ad uidendum esse natos neque aures ad audiendum neque pedes ad ambulandum, quoniam haec membra prius nata sint, quam esset usus uidendi et audiendi et ambulandi, sed horum omnium officia ex natis extitisse.
For he said that neither were the eyes born for seeing, nor the ears for hearing, nor the feet for walking, since these members were born before there was any use of seeing and hearing and walking; but that the functions of all these arose from the members once born.
Notes and citation
Summary: Epicurus claimed that eyes, ears, and feet were not made for their uses; the uses arose afterward.
- The view is set out in Lucretius, On the Nature of Things 4.823–842.
Extrabiblical texts: Lucretius, 4.823–842 (Lucretius, On the Nature of Things; allusion); Epicurus (Epicurus (sayings and fragments); allusion)
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.8 (CSEL 27.1:23; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-8).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-8) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.9CSEL 27.1:23
uereor ne huiusmodi portenta et deridicula refutare non minus ineptum esse uideatur, sed libet ineptire, quoniam cum inepto agimus, ne se ille nimis argutum putet. quid ais, Epicure?
I fear that refuting monstrous and ridiculous things of this kind may seem no less foolish; but I am glad to play the fool, since we are dealing with a fool, lest he think himself too clever. What do you say, Epicurus?
Notes and citation
Summary: Lactantius will answer Epicurus's folly, lest he think himself clever.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.9 (CSEL 27.1:23; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-9).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-9) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.10CSEL 27.1:23
non sunt oculi ad uidendum nati? cur igitur uident? postea inquit eorum usus apparuit. uidendi ergo causa nati sunt, siquidem nihil possunt aliud quam uidere. item membra cetera cuius rei causa nata sint, ipse usus ostendit: qui utique nullo modo posset existere, nisi essent membra omnia tam ordinate, tam prouidenter effecta, ut usum possent habere.
Were the eyes not born for seeing? Why, then, do they see? “Their use appeared afterward,” he says. So they were born for the sake of seeing, since they can do nothing but see. Likewise, for what purpose the other members were born, the use itself shows: which surely could in no way exist unless all the members had been made so orderly and so providently that they could have a use.
Notes and citation
Summary: Since eyes can only see, they were made for seeing; the uses of the members prove their design.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.10 (CSEL 27.1:23; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-10).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-10) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.11CSEL 27.1:23
quid enim si dicas aues non ad uolandum esse natas neque feras ad saeuiendum neque pisces ad natandum neque homines ad sapiendum, cum appareat ei naturae officioque seruire animantes ad quod est quaeque generata?
For what if you were to say that birds were not born for flying, nor wild beasts for fierceness, nor fish for swimming, nor men for wisdom, when it is plain that living creatures serve that nature and function for which each was produced?
Notes and citation
Summary: Every creature plainly serves the function for which it was made.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (hyphenation debris and words run together in the digital text): ad natan-. dumneque → ad natandum neque.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.11 (CSEL 27.1:23; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-11).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-11) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.12CSEL 27.1:23–24
sed uidelicet qui summam ipsam ueritatis amisit, semper erret necesse est. si enim non prouidentia, sed fortuitis atomorum concursionibus nascuntur omnia, cur numquam fortuito accidit sic coire illa principia, ut efficerent animal eiusmodi quod naribus potius audiret, odoraretur oculis, auribus cerneret?
But evidently he who has lost the very sum of truth must always go astray. For if all things are born not by providence but by chance collisions of atoms, why has it never happened by chance that those first principles came together so as to produce a living creature of such a kind that it would hear with its nostrils, smell with its eyes, and see with its ears?
Notes and citation
Summary: If chance ruled, we would find creatures that hear with their noses and see with their ears.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (words run together in the digital text): seduidelicet → sed uidelicet.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.12 (CSEL 27.1:23–24; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-12).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-12) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.13CSEL 27.1:24
si enim primordia nullum genus positionis inexpertum relinquunt, oportuit eiusmodi cottidie monstra generari in quibus et membrorum ordo praeposterus et usus longe diuersus existeret.
For if the first elements leave no kind of arrangement untried, such monsters ought to be produced daily, in which both the order of the members would be reversed and their use far different.
Notes and citation
Summary: If atoms tried every arrangement, monsters would be born every day.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.13 (CSEL 27.1:24; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-13).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-13) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.14CSEL 27.1:24
cum uero uniuersa genera et uniuersa in quoque membra leges suas et ordines et usus sibi attributos tueantur, manifestum est nihil fortuito esse factum, quoniam diuinae rationis dispositio perpetua seruatur.
But since all kinds, and all the members in each, keep their own laws and orders and the uses assigned to them, it is plain that nothing was made by chance, since the arrangement of the divine design is perpetually preserved.
Notes and citation
Summary: The constant order of every kind and member proves design, not chance.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.14 (CSEL 27.1:24; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-14).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-14) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.
6.15CSEL 27.1:24
uerum alias refellemus Epicurum: nunc de prouidentia ut coepimus disseramus.
But we shall refute Epicurus elsewhere; now let us discuss providence as we began.
Notes and citation
Summary: Lactantius postpones further refutation of Epicurus and returns to providence.
Cite (SBL): Lactantius, Opif. 6.15 (CSEL 27.1:24; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/lactantius-opificio/1-1/#p-6-15).
BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-lactantius-opificio-6-15) · Report an error
Translation: Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 27.1; made independently of existing English translations.