God cannot be housed or seen, yet is present everywhere

Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.

Octavius is answering Caecilius's charge that Christians have no temples, altars, or visible god, by arguing that the true God is worshiped in the mind and is known through his works and presence everywhere.

But do you think we hide what we worship because we have no shrines and altars? What idol could I fashion for God, when, if you judge rightly, man himself is God's idol? What temple could I build for him, when this whole world, made by his work, cannot contain him? And when I, a man, live in a wide space, should I confine the power of such majesty within one little shrine?

Is it not better to dedicate him in our mind? No, to consecrate him in our heart? Should I offer God victims and sacrifices, which he brought forth for my use, so that I throw his own gift back at him? That is ungrateful, when a good spirit and a pure mind and a sincere conscience are a pleasing victim.

So whoever cultivates innocence prays to God; whoever cultivates justice offers to God; whoever refrains from fraud appeases God; whoever rescues a person from danger slaughters a rich victim. These are our sacrifices, these are God's sacred rites: among us, the more just a person is, the more religious he is.

But the God we worship, you say, we neither show nor see. On the contrary, we believe God for this very reason: that we can perceive him, but cannot see him. For in his works and in all the movements of the world we behold his power always present, when it thunders, lightens, flashes lightning, when it clears.

Do not be surprised if you do not see God: wind and blasts drive, shake, and stir everything, and yet wind and blast do not come before the eyes. Even the sun, which is the cause of seeing for everyone, we cannot look at: our gaze is driven back by its rays, the viewer's sight is dulled, and if you look too long, all vision is extinguished.

What then? Could you endure the very maker of the sun, that source of light, when you turn away from his brilliance and hide from his lightning bolts? You want to see God with fleshly eyes, when you cannot even look at or grasp your own soul, by which you are given life and speech.

But, you say, God does not know human action, and established in heaven he cannot either visit everyone or know individuals. You err, O man, and you are deceived: for how is God far away, when all things heavenly and earthly, and those beyond this province of the world, are full of God? Everywhere he is not only near to us, but poured into us.

Look again at the sun: it is fixed in the sky, but it is spread over all lands; equally present everywhere, it is involved in and mingled with all things, and nowhere is its brightness violated.

How much more God, the author of all and watcher of all, from whom nothing can be hidden, is present in darkness, present in our thoughts, which are like another darkness! We do not merely act under him, but, I might almost say, we live with him.

Latin

Putatis autem nos occultare quod colimus, si delubra et aras non habemus? quod enim simulacrum Deo fingam, cum, si recte existimes, sit Dei homo ipse simulacrum? templum quod ei extruam, 'cum totus hic mundus eius opere fabricatus eum capere non possit? et cum homo latius maneam, intra unam aediculam uim tantae maiestatis includam ?

nonne Melius in nostra dedicandus est mente? in nostro immo consecrandus est pectore? hostias et uictimas Deo offeram, quas in usum mei protulit, ut reiciam ei suum munus? ingratum est, cum sit litabilis hostia bonus animus et pura mens et sincera conscientia.

igitur qui innocentiam colit, Deo supplicat, qui iustitiam, Deo libat, qui fraudibus abstinet, propitiat Deum, qui hominem periculo subripit, opimam uictimam caedit. haec nostra sacrificia, haec Dei sacra sunt: sic apud nos religiosior est ille qui iustior.

at enim quem colimus Deum, nec ostendimus nec uidemus. immo ex hoc Deum credimus, quod eum sentire possumus, uidere non possumus. in operibus enim eius et in mundi omnibus motibus uirtutem eius semper praesentem aspicimus, cum tonat, fulgurat, fulminat, cum serenat.

nec mireris, si Deum non uides: uento et flatibus omnia impelluntur, uibrantur, agitantur, et sub oculis tamen non uenit uentus et flatus. in solem adeo, qui uidendi omnibus causa est, uidere non possumus, radiis acies submouetur, obtutus intuentis hebetatur, et si diutius inspicias, omnis uisus extinguitur.

quid? ipsum solis artificem, illum luminis fontem, possis sustinere, cum te ab eius fulgoribus auertas, a fulminibus abscondas? Deum oculis carnalibus uis uidere, cum ipsam animam tuam, qua uiuificaris et loqueris, nec aspicerepossis nec tenere? sed enim Deus

actum hominis ignorat et in caelo constitutus non potest aut omnes obire aut singulos nosse. erras o homo, et falleris: unde enim Deus longe est, cum omnia caelestia terrenaque et quae extra istam orbis prouinciam sunt, Deo plena sint? ubique non tantum nobis proximus, sed infusus est.

in solem adeo rursus intende: caelo adfixus, sed terris omnibus sparsus est: pariter praesens ubique interest et miscetur omnibus, nusquam eius claritudo uiolatur.

quanto magis Deus auctor omniumac speculator omnium, a quo nullum potest esse secretum, tenebris interest, interest cogitationibus nostris, quasi alteris tenebris! non tantum sub illo agimus, sed et cum illo, ut prope dixerim, uiuimus.

About this text

A Latin dialogue set at Ostia: the pagan Caecilius and the Christian Octavius debate the old gods and the Christian faith.

Minucius Felix (fl. c. 200) was a Roman lawyer and Christian apologist who wrote in Latin. His only known work is the dialogue Octavius, composed in the Roman Empire as a defense of Christianity against pagan philosophy and skepticism. He wrote it to persuade educated non-Christians by presenting a reasoned debate between a pagan and a Christian.

The dialogue is framed as the author's recollection of a visit to Ostia with his friends Octavius and Caecilius. When Caecilius, a pagan, kisses a statue of Serapis, Octavius reproaches him, and Caecilius proposes a formal debate about pagan religion and Christianity, with the author as judge. The internal audience is Marcus, the narrator.

Caecilius first argues that human knowledge is uncertain, that Rome owes its greatness to traditional worship of the gods, and that Christians are a depraved secret society deserving punishment. Octavius replies that the order of the universe proves one creator God, that the pagan gods were merely deified humans and their myths are immoral, and that demons inspire pagan oracles and slanders against Christians. He defends Christian morals, worship, and hope of resurrection, and argues that Christian endurance under suffering shows God's power. Caecilius concedes defeat, acknowledges providence and the Christian God, and the friends depart joyfully. A reader should know that 'superstition' means false or excessive religious practice, 'religion' means proper worship, 'demons' are impure spirits that deceive humans, 'providence' is God's ordering and care of the universe, 'fate' is blind chance or destiny, 'resurrection' is the Christian hope of bodily restoration after death, 'idol' is an image of a pagan god, 'deity' is divine power, 'wisdom' is true wisdom available to all through reason, 'truth' is the truth about God and religion, 'incest' is alleged sexual immorality, 'sacrilege' is violation of what is sacred, 'spirit' is used of God's nature and of impure spirits, 'mind' is reason identified with God's nature, and 'reason' is rational order in the universe and human understanding of God.

New English from the Latin base text; no published English used as wording.

Printed text used

Translated from CSEL 2 (1867) (Latin)

This work has passed this project's source check. This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.