1. WHEN false witnesses testified against our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, He remained silent; and when unfounded charges were brought against Him, He returned no answer, believing  that His whole life and conduct among the Jews were a better refutation than any answer to the  false testimony, or than any formal defence against the accusations. And I know not, my pious  Ambrosius,[1] why you wished me to write a reply to the false charges brought by Celsus against  the Christians, and to his accusations directed against the faith of the Churches in his treatise; as  if the facts themselves did not furnish a manifest refutation, and the doctrine a better answer than  any writing, seeing it both disposes of the false statements, and does not leave to the accusations  any credibility or validity. Now, with respect to our Lord's silence when false witness was borne  against Him, it is sufficient at present to quote the words of Matthew, for the testimony of Mark is  to the same effect. And the words of Matthew are as follow: "And the high priest and the council  sought false witness against Jesus to put Him to death, but found none, although many false  witnesses came forward. At last two false witnesses came and said, This fellow said, I am able to  destroy the temple of God, and after three days to build it up. And the high priest arose, and said  to Him, Answerest thou nothing to what these witness against thee? But Jesus held His peace."[2]  And that He returned no answer when falsely accused, the following is the statement: "And Jesus  stood before the governor; and he asked Him, saying, Art Thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus  said to him, Thou sayest. And when He was accused of the chief priests and elders, He answered  nothing. Then said Pilate unto Him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against  Thee? And He answered him to never a word, insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly."[3]

2. It was, indeed, matter of surprise to men even of Ordinary intelligence, that one who was  accused and assailed by false testimony, but who was able to defend Himself, and to show that He  was guilty of none of the charges (alleged), and who might have enumerated the praiseworthy  deeds of His own life, and His miracles wrought by divine power, so as to give the judge an  opportunity of delivering a more honourable judgment regarding Him, should not have done this,  but should have disdained such a procedure, and in the nobleness of His nature have contemned  His accusers.[4] That the judge would, without any hesitation, have set Him at liberty if He had  offered a defence, is clear from what is related of him when he said, "Which of the two do ye  wish that I should release unto you, Barabbas or Jesus, who is called Christ?"[5] and from what  the Scripture adds, "For he knew that for envy they had delivered Him."[6] Jesus, however, is at  all times assailed by false witnesses, hand, while wickedness remains in the world, is ever  exposed to accusation. And yet even now He continues silent before these things, and makes no  audible answer, but places His defence in the lives of His genuine disciples, which are a pre- eminent testimony, and one that rises superior to all false witness, and refutes and overthrows all  unfounded accusations and charges.

3. I venture, then, to say that this "apology" which you require me to compose will somewhat  weaken that defence (of Christianity) which rests on facts, and that power of Jesus which is  manifest to those who are not altogether devoid of perception. Notwithstanding, that we may not have the appearance of being reluctant to undertake the task which you have enjoined, we  have endeavoured, to the best of our ability, to suggest, by way of answer to each of the  statements advanced by Celsus, what seemed to us adapted to refute them, although his  arguments have no power to shake the faith of any (true) believer. And forbid, indeed, that any  one should be found who, after having been a partaker in such a love of God as was (displayed) in  Christ Jesus, could be shaken in his purpose by the arguments of Celsus, or of any such as he. For  Paul, when enumerating the innumerable causes which generally separate men from the love of  Christ and from the love of God in Christ Jesus (to all of which, the love that was in himself rose  superior), did not set down argument among the grounds of separation. For observe that he says,  firstly: "Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or  persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? (as it is written, For Thy sake we are  killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.) Nay, in all these things we  are more than conquerors through Him that loved us."[1] And secondly, when laying down  another series of causes which naturally tend to separate those who are not firmly grounded in  their religion, he says: "For I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor  principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any  other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our  Lord."[2]

4. Now, truly, it is proper that we s