Caecilius's unease and the seating for the debate

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

The narrator Marcus is speaking; he and his friends have just watched boys playing on the shore, and now Caecilius shows distress at Octavius's earlier rebuke, so they sit down to debate.

So while all of us were carried away by the pleasure of the spectacle, Caecilius was paying no attention and not laughing at the contest. Silent, anxious, standing apart, his face confessed that something was troubling him.

I said to him, "What is this? Why do I not recognize that liveliness of yours, Caecilius? I miss that cheerfulness you used to have even in your eyes during serious matters."

Then he said, "For some time now the speech of our friend Octavius has been sharply tormenting and biting at me, the speech in which he attacked you and reproached you for negligence, so that by pretending to address you he was more severely accusing me of ignorance. So I will go further: my business with Octavius is total and complete. If it pleases you, as a man of the very sect he faults, let me debate with him, and he will soon understand that it is easier to debate among companions than to join wisdom together. Only let us sit down on those rocks thrown out for the protection of the baths and rising upward, so that we can both rest from the journey and debate more intently."

And with his words we sat down, so that, being the middle of the three, I might be protected by their desire. This was not out of deference to rank or honor, since friendship always makes or receives equals, but so that as judge and nearest to both I could give my ears to each and, seated in the middle, keep the two disputants apart.

Latin

Igitur cum omnes hac spectaculi uoluptate caperemur, Caecuius nihil intendere neque de contentione ridere, sed tacens, anxius, segregatus dolere nescio quid uultu fatebatur.

cui ego: Quid hoc est rei? cur non agnosco, Caecili, alacritatem tuam illam?

et illam ocnloram etiam in seriis hilaritatem requiro. tum ille: Iam dudum meOctaui nostri acriter angit et remordet oratio, qua in te inuectus obiurgauit neglegentiae, ut me dissimulanter grauius argueret inscientiae..

itaque progrediar ulterius: de toto et integro mihi cum Octauio res est. si placet, ut ipsius sectae homo cum eo disputem, iam profecto intelleget facilius esse in contubernalibus disputare quam conserere sapientiam:

modo in istis ad tutelam balnearum iactis et in altum procurrentibus petrarum obicibus residamus, ut et requiescere de itinere possimus et intentius disputare.

et cum dicto eius adsedimus, ita ut me ex tribus medium lateris ambitione protegerent: nec hoc obsequi fuit aut ordinis aut honoris, quippe cum amicitia pares semper aut accipiat aut faciat, sed ut arbiter et utrisque proximus aures darem et disceptantes duos medius segregarem.

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.