If we look either, in the Old Testament, to God, who instituted those [asylums], or, in the New, to the wisdom and authority of those who decreed the same, [then] beyond all doubt [it] will be [certain that] all [were] most rightly instituted. But what is asked is chiefly this: whether [there] are any reasons on account of which some not-imprudent [person] may judge these [to have been] rightly done. But these are found [to be] twofold: for some [are], as it were, general, [and] others [are] particular.
Of the former kind is [this], that in this way great honor seems to be paid to the Deity [Numen]. First: because his supreme majesty is shown, in that his places and houses are held so most-sacred, that — even if a detriment has been brought upon men, and [even if] either private or public good demands punishments — nevertheless, out of reverence for him, [if] anyone who has taken refuge be in them, no one dares to drag him out thence, [or] to violate or touch [him] there. Secondly: his mercy and kindness are proclaimed, in that he so embraces those who have betaken themselves to him, [and] have given themselves into his protection, that no one can harm them. Thirdly: the veneration owed to him by us is signified, in that, for his sake, and on account of his name, we suffer [allow] to be safe and unharmed those whom [it] would otherwise be lawful to take out of the midst [to kill], and perhaps to slaughter with exquisite [refined] tortures. Fourthly: his glory and greatness are celebrated, in that, in his name, [there] is such reverence even for inanimate altars, buildings, and places, that those who have entrusted their safety to them [are] harmed by no one — although perhaps [there] were a just cause, and power [to do so] were not lacking. Fifthly: provision is made for the innocence of many; a certain, as it were, bridle is cast upon the aroused anger and fury of certain [persons]; [and] time [is] granted — both to him who flees, for repentance, and to the others who pursue him, and demand [him] for death, for riper counsel and [for] moderation. Sixthly: a certain greater and more splendid opinion concerning divine things is procured for the multitude of men, when they see [that there] is so much of help and protection for wretched mortals in altars, temples, and religious buildings.
But the particular reasons seem to be these. 1. [It] was permitted to the Jews, that the avengers could inflict death upon the manslayers anywhere, both before and after the judicial sentence concerning their innocence. [It was] fair, therefore, that some places be granted to them [the manslayers], in which [they] might at least be safe. 2. Among the Christians [there] is no such permission, either before or after the Judges’ sentence; nevertheless, so that the too-ardent spirit and too-furious anger of certain [persons] — while they pursue those whom they think wicked — may be restrained, and [so] that [there] may be a notable and public testimony of Christian gentleness and moderation, the asylums [were] well instituted. 3. [It] would have disgraced the Israelites of old, and [it] disgraces the Christians, [that] more of honor be shown by the Gentiles to [their] most-false Gods — and sometimes to certain mortal Princes — than by those [Israelites and Christians] to the true and supreme God. But those [false] Gods of theirs, and even [mere] mannikins — certain princes — the Gentiles worshipped exceedingly with the immunity of asylums, as Agesilaus shows in Aemilius Probus [Cornelius Nepos] and in Xenophon; Euripides in the Suppliants; Virgil (Aeneid 1 & 6); Parthenius (ch. 9, “On Eros”). A witness concerning the “temple and altar of the Ephesian Diana” [is] Cicero against Verres, [and] Justin (bk. 28); Strabo (bk. 14), concerning “the temple of Venus”; Plautus, in the Rudens (act 3, sc. 3) & the Mostellaria (act 5, sc. 1), concerning the “altar of Mercy”; Pausanias (bk. 1, in the Attica); Theophilus, in the Paraphrase of the Institutes, §1 “On justice and law”; Statius, Thebaid, book 12:
“In the midst of the city [there] was an Altar of the Gods, granted to none of the powerful; [there] gentle Clemency placed [her] seat.”
Concerning the “temple of Thebes,” Pausanias in the Corinthiaca; concerning “Minerva,” the same [Pausanias] in the Attica & Laconica, and concerning “Pallas Chalcioecus” [Athena of the Bronze House] in the same place. And Diodorus (bk. 2), concerning “the [temple] of Apollo of Delos”; Livy (bk. 36), concerning “[that] of Jupiter”; Strabo (bk. 12), concerning “[that] of Hercules”; Herodotus (bk. 2), concerning “[that] of Neptune”; Pausanias in the Achaica. So also the standards [ensigns] of the camps were asylums. “[It was dangerous] especially for Plancus,” says Tacitus (bk. 1), “whom [his] dignity had hindered from fleeing, nor [was there] any other refuge for [him in his] peril than the camp of the first legion. There, embracing the standards and the eagle, he guarded himself by [their] religion [sanctity].” So too “the house of the Flamen Dialis,” in Gellius (bk. 10, ch. 15). So too “the statue of the Princes [Emperors],” in Philostratus, and [in] Ulpian from Labeo, in the law “What a fugitive is,” [under] the aedilician edict, in the title of the Pandects “Concerning those who flee to the statues.” Let Alexander ab Alexandro (bk. 3, ch. 20) be seen, with Tiraquellus. Indeed, St. Augustine writes [that] the glory of God, and of CHRIST, is thence greatly illustrated even among the Gentiles — because, by the barbarian Goths, when Rome [was] captured, [all] as many as had betaken themselves to the Christians’ temples were [kept] safe and sound. “Romulus and Remus,” he says (bk. 1 On the City of God, ch. 34), “are reported to have established an Asylum, to which whosoever fled would be free from all harm — [they] seeking to augment the multitude of the city [that was] to be created. A wonderful example, in honor of CHRIST, preceded [this]. The overthrowers of the city [the Goths] established this [same thing] which the founders had established before. But what [was it] great, if those [founders] did [this] so that the number of their [own] citizens might be supplied, [compared with] what these [Goths] did, so that the multitude of their [own] enemies might be preserved?” And (ch. 1): “The shrines of the Martyrs, and the basilicas of the Apostles, in that devastation of the city, received [both] their own and strangers [who] fled to them. Up to this [point] the bloody enemy raged; there the fury of the slayer received [its] limit; thither [refugees] were led by pitying enemies, who had spared [them] even outside those places, lest they run into those [other enemies] who had not a like mercy. Who [enemies], however — [though] themselves savage elsewhere, and raging in hostile manner
(col. 1223)
[…Augustine’s quote, continued from col. 1222:] after they came to those places where [it] had been forbidden [to do] what elsewhere the right of war would have allowed, [then] the whole license of striking was reined in, and the desire of taking captive was broken.” And truly, [even] if [there] were no other usefulness, this one is surely most notable — [that], through the religion [sanctity] of asylums of this kind, in wars — if not altogether always, yet for the most part and very often — the enemies’ sword-points are blunted; and [that] the right hands which revel [bacchanate] in slaughter and blood elsewhere, here grow mild, and, as [if] broken and weakened, languish. But [for more], if indeed [your] spirit so inclines — consult Azorius (bk. 8 of the Moral Institutions, ch. 9, part 2).