Salvete all you omniscient textkitters!
Can someone be kind to help me, so that I may grasp at least a bit of the meaning of these sentences. The context is that Erasmus after telling about how eloquent and skilled Arnobius was, then after conversion he tempered his high style:
Atque hoc factum obedientiam vocat, ut coniectura sit aut catechumenum loqui, aut certe recens Christianum. Proinde si quis reputet quibus ista scribat Arnobius, non debet videri soloecismus, si quid inciderit diversum a consuetudine loquentium emendatius, imo soloecismus erat nisi sic fuisse locutus.
(please help me here:)
And this deed called to obedience, so that an appearance (?coniectura?) that he spoke either as a catechumen, or as a new Christian. Therefore, if anyone might think that Arnobius wrote with these (solecisms), it should not be regarded as solecisms, if something different from the habit of the speaking should appear more correct, it indeed was a solecism if it was not the way he spoke.
I settled on adding a very woody translation, let me know if it doesn’t help!