God, and in all things to give thanks? “Why then?” replies some one, “did not Cain bring 423 his offering?” This man also did offer sacrifice, but not in like manner. And from thence again the knowledge of conscience is apparent. For when, envying him who had been hon- oured, he deliberated upon murder, he conceals his crafty determination. And what says he; “Come, let us go forth into the field.”1529 The outward guise was one thing, the pretence of love; the thought another, the purpose of fratricide. But if he had not known the design to be a wicked one, why did he conceal it? And again, after the murder had been perpetrated, being asked of God, “Where is Abel thy brother?” he answers, “I know not; Am I my brother’s keeper?” Wherefore does he deny the crime? Is it not evidently because he exceed- ingly condemns himself. For as his father had hid himself, so also this man denies his guilt, and after his conviction, again says, “My crime is too great to obtain pardon.”1530 12. But it may be objected, that the Gentile allows nothing of this sort. Come then, let us discuss this point, and as we have done with respect to the creation, having carried on the warfare against these objectors not only by the help of the Scriptures, but of reason, so also let us now do with respect to conscience. For Paul too, when he was engaged in contro- versy with such persons, entered upon this head. What then is it that they urge? They say, that there is no self-evident law seated in our consciences; and that God hath not implanted this in our nature. But if so, whence is it, I ask, that legislators have written those laws which are among them concerning marriages, concerning murders, concerning wills, concerning trusts, concerning abstinence from encroachments on one another, and a thousand other things. For the men now living may perchance have learned them from their elders;1531 and enjoined, are typical, and represented as typical in Holy Scripture. And again, sacrifice, if it originated in God’s gift of reason, was certainly sanctioned, and endowed with an atoning power, by His special laws. The prevailing neglect of our Eucharistic oblation as such, and separating in thought our partaking of the sacrifice of our Lord from the sacrament of the altar, tend to obscure men’s views on this subject. It is, however, difficult to conceive how the sacrifice of animals should have occurred to man, without some divine indication beyond the permission to use them for food. St. Chrys. on Gen. iv. Hom. XVIII. (5), speaks of nothing more than an offering “out of our possessions” as taught by natural conscience; and of Abel’s offering being of the first-born, and of the best, as a proof of his devotion. On this view the type would arise from the divine permission of animal food. 1529 Gen. iv. 9. This clause is added in the Vulgate as well as the Septuagint. The Hebrew seems to present an hiatus after (said rather than spake). The Targum of Jerusalem and that called of Jonathan supply it, Tr. (The Samaritan and Syriac and Aquila also contain this clause. Origen did not find it in the Hebrew, and Onkelos omits it. Michælis quotes John xviii. 16, to meet the difficulty. Some render the word told, and refer it to what went before.). 1530 Gen. iv. 13, LXX. 1531 πρώτων, Lat. majoribus natu, which suggests πρὸ αὐτῶν, or πρεσβυτ™ρων, but 6 mss. agree. See Hom. IX. in St. Matt. ed. Field. 614 Homily XII