Lactantius, Divine Institutes 1.20

I turn now to Rome's own cults, having already addressed the common ones. Divine honors were bestowed on the wolf that nursed Romulus — and one might accept that, if the actual animal were the object of worship. But Livy records that the image honored was not the wolf's body but the mind and character of Larentia. She was Faustulus' wife, and because of the shame attached to her body, the shepherds called her 'Lupa' — that is, a prostitute; hence the word 'lupanar' for a brothel. The Romans followed the Athenian precedent in shaping this figure: when the prostitute Leaena killed a tyrant at Athens, they could not lawfully erect her statue in a temple, so they set up an effigy of the animal whose name she bore. Thus the Athenians made a monument from a name; the Romans made one from a profession. A feast day was dedicated to her name, and the Larentalia were instituted. Nor do the Romans worship only this prostitute; they also worship Faula, whom Verrius records as the mistress of Hercules. What kind of immortality is this that even harlots attain? Flora, after amassing great wealth through prostitution, made the Roman people her heir and left a sum whose annual interest would fund games on her birthday — the games called Floralia. The Senate found this shameful, so it was decided to derive a pretext from the name itself, to lend some dignity to a disgraceful thing. They invented a goddess presiding over flowers who must be placated so that crops, trees, and vines might flourish. The poet in the Fasti followed this coloring, telling how a noble nymph named Chloris, wed to Zephyr, received from her husband the dominion over all flowers as a bridal gift. The story is told honorably, but it is believed shamefully and basely; such veils must not deceive us when we seek the truth. Accordingly those games are celebrated with all lasciviousness, fittingly commemorating a harlot. For beyond the license of speech that pours out every obscenity, prostitutes strip naked at the crowd's demand, act as mimes, and are held in public view with shameful movements until the spectators are sated. Tatius consecrated the image of Cloacina, found in the Cloaca Maxima; ignorant of whose likeness it was, he named her from the place. Tullus Hostilius fashioned and worshiped Pavor and Pallor. What can one say of this, except that it befitted a man who always kept his gods at hand, as people commonly wish? This differs from Marcus Marcellus' consecration of Honor and Virtue in the honesty of the names, yet agrees in the substance. The Senate, in the same vanity, placed Mind among the gods — a Mind which, if they truly possessed it, would never have led them to undertake such rites. Cicero calls it a bold and great design of the Greeks to have consecrated images of Cupids and Loves in the gymnasia; he was plainly flattering Atticus and mocking a friend. For it was neither great nor a design at all, but the lost and desperate wickedness of shameless men who prostituted their own children — whom they ought to have trained in honor — to the lust of youth. From such men came the demand that gods of shame be worshiped precisely in those places where naked bodies lie exposed to corrupt eyes, and at that age which is simple and unwary, more easily caught in snares than able to guard against them. What wonder if every vice flowed from a people among whom vices themselves are religious — not only not avoided, but actually worshiped? Therefore Cicero added, as if the Greeks excelled in prudence: 'Virtues ought to be consecrated, not vices.' But if you accept that, Marcus Tullius, do you not see that vices will burst in alongside virtues, because evils cling to goods and are more powerful in human minds? And if you forbid the consecration of vices, Greece will answer that she worships some gods to gain their help, others to avert their harm — the perpetual excuse of those who make their evils into gods, as the Romans do with Rust and Fever. So if vices are not to be consecrated — a point I grant — then neither should virtues. For virtues do not possess wisdom or feeling in themselves, nor do they dwell within walls or mud-built shrines; they must be lodged in the heart and grasped inwardly, lest they become false when placed outside a man. Therefore I mock that famous law of yours which you phrase thus: 'But for the man to whom ascent to heaven is given, let there be temples of Mind, Virtue, Piety, Faith.' Yet these cannot be separated from man. If they are to be worshiped, they must exist in man himself. If they exist outside him, what use is it to worship what you lack? Virtue is to be worshiped, not the image of virtue; and it is to be worshiped not by sacrifice, incense, or formal prayer, but by will and purpose alone. For what is worshiping virtue except comprehending it with the mind and holding it fast? Each person achieves this the moment he begins to will it. This alone is the worship of virtue: for no religion or reverence is due except to the one God. Why then, wisest of men, occupy space with superfluous buildings that could serve human needs? Why appoint priests to tend vain and senseless things? Why immolate victims? Why spend such sums fabricating and worshiping images? The human heart is a stronger and more incorruptible temple: let it be adorned, let it be filled with true divinities. These false consecrations follow of necessity. For those who worship virtues this way — that is, who chase shadows and images of virtues — cannot hold the true virtues themselves. Hence there is no virtue in anyone, vices reigning everywhere; no faith, each seizing everything for himself; no piety, greed and lust driving men to poison and the sword, sparing neither kin nor parents; no peace, no concord, public wars raging and private hatreds flaming to bloodshed; no chastity, unbridled lusts defiling every sex and every part of the body. And yet they do not cease to worship the very things they flee and hate. They offer incense and the pinch of fingertips to things they ought to abhor with their inmost senses — an error springing from ignorance of the highest and chief Good. When the Gauls occupied the city and the Romans were besieged on the Capitol, they made catapults from women's hair and consecrated a temple to Venus Calva. Thus they do not perceive how empty their religions are, even from the fact that they mock them with such follies. Perhaps they learned from the Lacedaemonians to invent gods from events. When the Lacedaemonians besieged the Messenians, and the Messenians slipped out by deceit to plunder Lacedaemon, they were routed by Spartan women. The Lacedaemonians, discovering the trick, pursued. Armed women went out to meet them at a distance. Seeing their husbands preparing for battle, thinking them Messenians, the women bared their bodies. The men, recognizing their wives and inflamed to lust, mingled with them promiscuously, still armed — there was no time to distinguish — just as the young men sent earlier with the virgins, from whom the Partheniae were born. In memory of this deed they erected a temple and image to Venus Armata: which, though born of a shameful cause, seems more honorable than consecrating Venus Calva. At the same time an altar was set up to Jupiter the Baker, because he had warned them in a quiet moment to bake all their grain into bread and throw it into the enemy camp; this done, the siege was lifted, the Gauls despairing of starving the Romans. What mockery of religion is this? If I were its defender, what could I complain of more gravely than that the divine numen has sunk to such contempt as to be ridiculed by the most shameful names? Who would not laugh at Fornax the oven-goddess, or rather at learned men busying themselves with the Fornacalia? Who can keep from laughter on hearing of the goddess Muta? They say she is the mother of the Lares, and call her Lara or Larunda. What can she grant a worshipper who cannot speak? They also worship Iaca, who betrayed her brother to Hercules about the cattle theft and won divinity for her treachery; and Cunina, who guards infants in cradles and averts the evil eye; and Stercutus, who first taught the art of manuring fields; and Tutinus, in whose shameful lap brides sit, as if the god must first taste their chastity; and a thousand other monsters — so that we might say those who undertook to worship these are more foolish than the Egyptians, who venerate monstrous and ridiculous images. Even those have some semblance. What of those who worship an unshaped, rude stone named Terminus? This is the stone Saturn is said to have swallowed, and not without reason is he honored. When Tarquinius wished to build the Capitol, many gods' shrines stood on the site; he consulted them by augury whether they would yield to Jupiter. The others yielded; Terminus alone stood fast. Hence the poet calls him the immovable rock of the Capitol. From this very fact we see how great Jupiter is — to whom not even a stone yielded, perhaps trusting that he had freed it from his father's jaws. So when the Capitol was built, a hole was left in the roof above Terminus, that he might enjoy the open sky since he had not yielded — a sky which not even those who thought the stone enjoyed it could enjoy themselves. Public supplication is therefore made to him as guardian of boundaries, though he is not only a stone but sometimes a mere stake. What can we say of those who worship such things, except that they themselves are rather stones and stakes?