MINTON, HENRY COLLIN: Presbyterian; b.
at Prosperity, Pa., May 8, 1855. He was educated
at Washington and Jefferson College (A.B., 1879)
and Western Theological Seminary, Allegheny, Pa.,
from which he was graduated in 1882. He then
held successive pastorates at the First Presbyterian
Church, Duluth, Minn. (1882-83), Second Presbyterian Church, Baltimore, Md. (1883--84; but was
not installed on account of ill-health); First Presbyterian Church, San Josh, Cal. (1884-91), and St.
John's Presbyterian Church, San Francisco (1891-1892). From 1892 to 1902 he was Stuart professor
of systematic theology in San Francisco Theological
Seminary, and since the latter year has been pastor
of the First Presbyterian Church, Trenton, N. J:
He was moderator of the General Assembly of the
Presbyterian Church in the United States in 1901,
chairman of the Committee on the Revision of the
Confession of Faith in 1901-02, Stone lecturer in
Princeton Theological Seminary in 1902, and special
lecturer in theology in Auburn Theological Seminary in the same year. He has written Christianity
Supernatural (Philadelphia, 1900) and The Cosmos
and the Logos
(1902).
1. Introduction
Marcus Minucius Felix was the first Latin apolo
gist of Christianity, and the author of the dialogue
"Octavius." From a few references
in Lactantius, Jerome, and Eucherius,
it is learned that Marcus Minucius Felix
lived at Rome as a successful lawyer,
and was also active in a
literary way. From the
dialogue it appears that he had
formed a friend
ship with his fellow student Octavius Januarius,
and soon followed his friend in embracing Chris
tianity. Both friends were attorneys; Octavius
in the provinces, Minucius at Rome. It was while
Octavius was visiting his friend that the conversartion
occurred which is described in the dialogue.
His friend was dead, however, when Minucius wrote.
Inasmuch as the holidays had begun, they resolved
on an excursion to Ostia, and were joined by a
younger friend of Minucius, the pagan Cmeilius
Natalia. As they were strolling along the Tiber
they passed a statue of Serapis, and Octavius ob
served that Ceecilius reverently saluted it. So he
reproached his friend for not having yet convinced
Ceecilius of his error. Cmcilius, displeased at this,
became silent and paid no attention to the others.
Being questioned, he acknowledged the true reason,
and wished to defend his religion, and explain his
grounds for not accepting Christianity. Octavius
could then confute him. The latter agreed; they
sat down and Minucius took his place between them.
Cmeilius began by saying that all human knowledge is uncertain; and blamed the Christians for
venturing to say anything about the
2. Argument
government of the world, which might
owe its being to accident, for many
against things directly contradict the presence
Christianity. of a divine agent. The truth either
eludes
knowledge, or, what
is most
probable, an arbitrary
destiny rules; therefore the
best course is to keep to the religion of the fathers,
who made Rome great and established and extended her supremacy. Often enough had the
gods of the Romans shown their power. To think
of overthrowing so ancient a religion spoke of insufferable presumption. Besides, what sort of peopie were they who planned such an act, and what
was the new religion that was to succeed the old P
Ignorant men from the dregs of the populace, and
credulous women, who flattered themselves with
the ridiculous comfort of a life after death. Their
religious customs were altogether repulsive, their
ceremonies were the murder of innocent children
and adultery. Their secrecy was the best proof as
to the depravity of their religion. No less peculiar
than absurd was their conception of the one God,
a being invisible, omniscient, omnipresent. Then,
too, their doctrine of the destruction of the world,
the resurrection of the dead, and the last judgment,
could not be sound, since divine predestination no
less denied the freedom of the will than did fate.
To crown all, the Christians must endure not only
the ordinary miseries of poverty, cold and hunger,
but also torture, death by fire and crucifixion. Why,
they even voluntarily increased their wretchedness
by abstaining from honest pleasures. C4eoilius
closed with an exhortation to abstain from examining into things divine.
Thoroughly persuaded as to the convincing force
of his deductions, Cmeilius ironically challenged
Octavius to an answer. Octavius be-
3. Argument
gan by showing contradictions of
for Ceecilius. All men were endowed with
Christianity. reason which, together with observation
of nature, led to the conviction of
the existence of a
superior being,
creator and ruler
of the world. Nature spoke plainly, though leaving
the question open whether the government of
the world was exercised by one or several. But
even among men, the monarchical form of rule was
the sole advantageous form; nor was it different
among animals. Then Ootavius explained Chris
tian monotheism, speaking of the eternity, omnipo
tence, and perfection of God, of whom poets and
philosophers had often surmised correctly. Antiq
uity was very credulous; its fables and tales de
served no credence; its gods, after all, were only
deified men. Idols were mere wood and stone;
their nothingness was proved by their origin. It
was false that the heathen gods had made Rome
great, because they were, to a prevailing extent,
foreign gods. The auguries and auspices had occa
sionally furnished correct indications, but had still
often deceived the believers. Idol worship had
found so wide an acceptance because of the demons,
authors of everything evil. They, too, had caused
hatred and persecutions against Christianity, circulating all those rumors and reproaches more justly
applying to the heathen service of idols. With
moral indignation Octavius paid ample tribute to
the purity of the Christians' manner of life, divine
worship and faith; and spoke of the righteousness
and goodness of God. Their doctrine of the end of
all things contradicted neither the laws of nature nor
the teachings of the philosophers. Christians welcomed adversity as a school for virtue; the prosperity in which the heathen rejoiced was transitory
and fallacious and heathens' pleasures were censurable and indecent. This discourse made a powerful impression upon Caecilius,
who admitted his defeat, and the three returned to the city.
