CHAP. XXIX. — THE GRADUAL DEVELOPMENT OF COSMIC AL ORDER OUT OF CHAOS IN THE CREATION, BEAUTIFULLY STATED.
God, indeed, consummated all His works in a due order; at first He paled them out,' as it were, in their unformed elements, and then He arranged them^ in their finished beauty. For He did not all at once inundate light with the splendour of the sun, nor all at once temper darkness with the moon's as- suaging ray. 5 The heaven He did not all at once bedeck '° with constellations and stars, nor did He at once fill the seas with their teem- 'Deo subjacebat.
2 See below, ch. xxx. p. 494.
.1 Matter.
4 " Corapertus est " is here a deponent verb.
5 Minus factum.
* Rudimento. TertuUian uses the word " rudis" (unformed) for the scriptural term (" void "); of this word " rudimentum " is the abstract.
7 Depalans.
* Dedicans: " disposed " them.
9 Solatio lunse: a beautiful expression! ■" Significavit.
ing monsters." The earth itself He did not endow with its varied fruitfulness all at once; but at first He bestowed upon it being, and then He filled it, that it might not be made in vain." For thus says Isaiah: " He created it not in vain; He formed it to be inhabit- ed. "'^ Therefore after it was made, and while awaiting its perfect stiite,"'' it was "with- out form, and void:" "void" indeed, from the very fact that it was without form (as be- ing not yet perfect to the sight, and at the same time unfurnished as yet with its other qualities);'^ and "without form," because it was still covered with waters, as if with the rampart of its fecundating moisture,'^ by which is produced our flesh, in a form allied with its own. For to this purport does David say:'' "The earth is the Lord's, and the ful- ness thereof; the world, and all that dwell therein: He hath founded it upon the seas, and on the streams hath He established it." '* It was when the waters were withdrawn into their hollow abysses that the dry land became conspicuous, '5 which was hitherto covered with its watery envelope. Then it forthwith becomes " visible," ™ God saying, " Let the water be gathered together into one mass,''* and let the dry land appear." "' ''Appear," says He, not " ^<? made." It had been already made, only in its invisible condition it was then waiting^'^to appear. "Dry," because ii was about to become such by its severance from the moisture, but yet "land." "And God called the dry land Earth " '* not Matter. And so, when it afterwards attains its perfec- tion, it ceases to be accounted void, when God declares, " Let the earth bring forth grass, the nerb yielding seed after its kind, and ac- cording to its likeness, and the fruit-tree yield- ing fruit, whose seed is in itself, after its kind." ^s Again: " Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, after their kind."^* Thus the divine Scripture accomplished its full order. For to that, which it had at first described as "without form (invisible) and void," it gave both visi- bility and completion. Now no other Matter was "without form (invisible) and void."
" Belluis.
»2 In vacuum: void.
'4 Futura etiam perfecta.
'5 De reliquo nondum instructa.
'6 Genitalis humoris.
•7 Canit: " sing," as the Psalmist.
'9 Emicantior.
^ "Visibilis" is here the opposite of the term " invisibilis," which TertuUian uses for the Scripture phrase " wnthout form."
=' In congregatione una.
AGAINST HERMOGENES.
[chap. xxxr.
Henceforth, then, Matter will have to be vis- ible and complete. So that I must' see Mat- ter, since it has become visible. I must likewise recognize it as a completed thing, so as to be able to gather from it the herb bear- ing seed, and the tree yielding fruit, and that living creatures, made out of it, may minister to my need. Matter, however, is nowhere,^ but the Earth is here, confessed to my view. I see it, I enjoy it, ever since it ceased to be " v/ithout form (invisible), and void." Concerning it most certainly did Isaiah speak when he said, " Thus saith the Lord that created the heavens. He was the God that formed the earth, and made it."^ The same earth for certain did He form, which He also made. Now how did He form-' it? Of course by saying, "Let the dry land appear." ^ Why does He command it to appear, if it were not previously invisible? His purpose ivas also, that He might thus prevent His having made it in vain, by ren- dering it visible, and so fit for use. And thus, throughout, proofs arise to us that this earth which we inhabit is the very same which was both created and formed * by God, and that none other was "without form, and void," than that which had been created and formed. It therefore follows that the sentence, " Now the earth was without form, and void," applies to that same earth which God mentioned separately along with the heaven. ^ CHAP. XXX. ANOTHER PASSAGE IN THE SACRED HISTORY OF THE CREATION, RELEASED FROM THE MISHANDLING OF HERMOGENES.
The following words will in like manner ap- parently corroborate the conjecture of Her- mogenes, "And darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the water;"* as if these blended ' substances, presented us with argu- ments for his massive pile of Matter.^" Now, so discriminating an enumeration of certain and distinct elements (as we have in this passage), which severally designates " darkness," "the deep" "the Spirit of God," "the waters," forbids the inference that anything confused or (from such confusion) uncertain is meant. Stili more, when He ascribed to them their own places," " darkness on the face of the deep," " the Spirit ttpon the face of the waters," He • Volo.
- He means, of course, the theoretic " Matter " of Hermogenes.
•» Uemonstravit: " make it visible." Tertullian here all along makes _/i)r7« and 7'isibility synonymous.
9Confusae.
'" Massalis illius molis. " Situs.
" without condition repudiated all confusion in the substances; and by demonstrating their separate position," He demonstrated also their distinction. Most absurd, indeed, would it be that Matter, which is introduced to our view as form," should have its " formless ' maintained by so many words indicative of form, '3 without any intimation of what that confused body '■* is, which must of course be supposed to be unique, '^ since it is without form.'* For that which is without form is uniform; but even'? that which is without form, when it is blended together'^ from va- rious component parts, ''must necessarily have one outward appearance; ''° and it has not any appearance, until it has the one ap- pearance (which comes) from many parts combined.''' Now Matter either had those spe- cific parts ^= within itself, from the words indic- ative of which it had to be understood — I mean "darkness," and "the deep," and "the Spirit," and "the waters" — or it had them not. If it had them, how is it intro- duced as being " without form? " ^^ jf jt had them not, how does it become known?^ CHAP. XXXI. A FURTHER VINDICATION OF THE SCRIPTURE NARRATIVE OF THE CREATION, AGAINST A FUTILE VIEW OF HERMOGENES.
But this circumstance, too, will be caught at, that Scripture meant to indicate of the heaven only, and this earth of yours,'s that God made it in the beginning, while nothing of the kind is said of the above-mentioned specific parts;^* and therefore that these, which are not described as having been made, appertain to unformed Matter. To this point *? also we must give an answer. Holy Scripture would be sufficiently explicit, if it had declared that the heaven and the earth, as the very highest works of creation, were made by God, possessing of course their own special appurtenances,^* which might be un- derstood to be implied in these highest works themselves. Now the appurtenances of the heaven and the earth, made then in the be- ginning, were the darkness and the deep, and the spirit, and the waters. For the deptli and the darkness underlay the earth. Since '2 Dispositionem.
'3 Tot formarum vocabulis.
•4 Corpus conf usionis.
■5 Unicum.
'6 Informe.
'7 Autem.
■* Confusum.
'9 Ex varietate.
^Unam speciem.
2« Unam ex multis speciem.
^ Istas species.
^^3 Non habens formas.
24 Agnoscitur.
25 Ista: the earth, which has been the subject of conteation. ^ Speciebus.
27Scrupulo: doubt or difficulty.
=8 Suggestus: " Hoc est, appa'ratu.s, orjiatus " (Oehler).
CHAP. XXXII.]
AGAINST HERMOGENES.
the deep was under the earth, and the dark- ness was over the deep, undoubtedly both the darkness and the deep were under the earth. Below the heaven, too, lay the spirit ' and the waters. For since the waters were over the earth, which they covered, whilst the spirit was over the waters, both the spirit and the waters were alike over the earth. Now that which is over the earth, is of course under the heaven. And even as the earth brooded over the deep and the dark- ness, so also did the heaven brood over the spirit and the waters, and embrace them. Nor, indeed, is there any novelty in men- tioning only that which contains, as pertain- ing to the whole,- and understanding that which is contained as included in it, in its character of a portion. ^ Suppose now I should say the city built a theatre and a cir- cus, but the stage * was of such and such a kind, and the statues were on the canal, and the obelisk was reared above them all, would it follow that, because I did not distinctly state that these specific things ^ were made by the city, they were therefore not made by it along with the circus and the theatre? Did I not, indeed, refrain from specially men- tioning the formation of these particular things because they were implied in the things which I had already said were made, and might be understood to be inherent in the things in which they were contained? But this example may be an idle one as being derived from a human circumstance; I will take another, which has the authority of Scripture itself. It says that " God made man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul." * Now, although it here mentions the nostrils," it does not say that they were made by God; so again it speaks of skin* and bones, and flesh and eyes, and sweat and blood, in subsequent passages,' and yet it never intimated that they had been created by God. What will Hermogenes have to answer? That the hu- man limbs must belong to Matter, because they are not specially mentioned as objects of creation? Or are they included in the forma- tion of man? In like manner, the deep and the darkness, and the spirit and the waters, were as members of the heaven and the earth. For in the bodies the limbs were made, in the 1 It will be obsen-ed that TertuUian applies the spirit us to the viad as a creature.
2 Qua summale.
3 Qua portionale.
4 Scena.
5 Has species.
7 Both in the quotation and here, Tertullian read " faciem" T\here we read " nostrils."
SCutem: another reading has " costam," rib. 9 See Gen. ii. 21, 23, iii. 5, 19, iv, 10.
bodies the limbs too were mentioned. No element but what is a member of that element in which it is contained. But all elements are contained in the heaven and the earth.
CHAP. XXXII. — THE ACCOUNT OF THE CREATION IN GENESIS A GENERAL ONE. CORROBO- RATED, HOWEVER, BY MANY OTHER PASSAGES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, WHICH GIVE AC- COUNT OF SPECIFIC CREATIONS. FURTHER CAVILLINGS CONFUTED.
This is the answer I should give in defence of the Scripture before us, for seeming here to set forth '° the formation of the heaven and the earth, as if (they were) the sole bodies j?iade. It could not but know that there were those who would at once in the bodies under- stand their several members also, and there- fore it employed this concise mode of speech. But, at the same time, it foresaw that there would be stupid and crafty men, who, after paltering with the virtual meaning," would require for the several members a word de- scriptive of their formation too. It is there- fore because of such persons, that Scripture in other passages teaches us of the creation of the individual parts. You have Wisdom say- ing, " But before the depths was I brought forth,"" in order that you may believe that the depths were also "brought forth" — that is, created — just as we create sons also, though we " bring them forth." It matters not whether the depth was made or born, so that a beginning be accorded to it, which hmu- «w would not be, if it were subjoined '3 to matter. Of darkness, indeed, the Lord Him- self by Isaiah says, " I formed the light, and I created darkness.""* Of the wind's also Amos says, " He that strengtheneth the thun- der,'^ and createth the wind, and declareth His Christ'^ unto men;"'' thus showing that that wind was created which was reckoned with the formation of the earth, which was wafted over the waters, balancing and refresh- ing and animating all things: not (as some sup- pose) meaning God Himself by the spirit,'^ on the ground that " God is a Spirit," '' because the waters would not be able to bear up their Lord; but He speaks of that spirit of which the winds consist, as He says by Isaiah, " Because my spirit went forth from me, and I made every blast." ^ In like manner the '° Quatenus hie commendare videtur. >i Dissimulate tacito intellectu. '^Prov. viii. 24. •3 Subjecta.
15 De spiritu. This shows that TertiJllian took the spirit of Gen. i. 2 in the inferior sense.
16 So also the Septuagint.
ao Flatum: " breath;" so LXX. of Isa. Ivii. 16.
AGAINST HERMOGENES.
[chap. XXXIV.
same Wisdom says of the waters, " Also when He made the fountains strong, things which ' are under the sky, I was fashioning' them along with Him."^ Now, when we prove that these particular things were created by God, although they are only mentioned in Genesis, without any intimation of their hav- ing been made, we shall perhaps receive from the other side the reply, that these were made, it is true,* but out of Matter, since the very statement of Moses, " And darkness was on the face of the deep, and the spirit of God moved on the face of the waters," ^ refers to Matter, as indeed do all those other Scrip- tures here and there,* which demonstrate that the separate parts were made out of Matter. It must follow, then,' that as earth consisted of earth, so also depth consisted of depth, and darkness of darkness, and the wind and waters of wind and waters. And, as we said above,* Matter could not have been without form, since it had specific parts, which were formed out of it — although as separate things ^ — unless, indeed, they were not separate, but were the very same with those out of which they came. For it is really impossible that those specific things, which are set forth under the same names, should have been diverse; because in that case '° the operation of God might seem to be useless," if it made things which existed already; since that alone would be a crea- tion,'= when things came into being, which had not been (previously) made. Therefore, to conclude, either Moses then pointed to Matter when he wrote the words: " And dark- ness was on the face of the deep, and the spirit of God moved on the face of the waters;" or else, inasmuch as these specific parts of creation are afterwards shown in other passages to have been made by God, they ought to have been with equal explicit- ness '3 shown to have been made out of the Matter which, accordmg to you, Moses had previously mentioned;'■* or else, firially, if Moses pointed to those specific parts, and not to Matter, I want to know where Matter has been pointed out at all.
' Pontes, quae. = Modulans.
3 Prov. viii. 28.
4 Plane.
* In disperse.
7 Ergo: Tertullian's answer. *Ch. XXX., towards the end. 9Ut et aliae. »o Jam. " Otiosa.
»2 Generatio: creation in the highest sense of matter issuing from the maker. Another reading has " generosiora essent," for our " generatio sola esset," meaning that " those things would be no- bler which had not b<^n made, which is obviously quite opposed lo Tertullian's argument. MPra:miserat.
CHAP. XXXIII. STATEMENT OF THE TRUE DOC- TRINE CONCERNING MATTER. ITS RELATION TO god's CREATION OF THE WORLD.
But although Hermogenes finds it amongst his own colourable pretences '^ (for it was not in his power to discover it in the Scriptures of God), it is enough for us, both that it is cer- tain that all things were made by God, and that there is no certainty whatever that they were made out of Matter. And even if Mat- ter had previously existed, we must have believed that it had been really made by God, since we maintained (no less) when we held the rule of faith to be,'* that nothing except God was uncreated.'' Up to this point there is room for controversy, until Matter is brought to the test of the Scriptures, and fails to make good its case.'* The conclusion of the whole is this: I find that there was nothinir made, except out of nothing; because that which I find was made, I know did not once exist. Whatever '5 was made out of some- thing, has its origin in something made: for instance, out of the ground was made the grass, and the fruit, and the cattle, and the form of man himself; so from the waters were produced the animals which swim and fly. The original fabrics^ out of which such creatures were produced I may call their materials y''^ but then even these were created by God.
CHAP. XXXIV. — A PRESUMPTION THAT ALL THINGS WERE CREATED BY GOD OUT OF NOTH- ING AFFORDED BY THE ULTIMATE REDUCTION OF ALL THINGS TO NOTHING. SCRIPTURES PROVING THIS REDUCTION VINDICATED FROM HERMOGENES' CHARGE OF BEING MERELY FIGURATIVE.
Besides, ^'^ the belief that everything was made from nothing will be impressed upon us by that ultimate dispensation of God which will bring back all things to nothing. For "the very heaven shall be rolled together as a scroll;" =^3 nay, it shall come to nothing along with the earth itself, with which it was made in the beginning. " Heaven and earth shall pass away,"='* says He. "The first heaven and the first earth passed away,""^ "and there was found no place for them," ^ because, of course, that which comes to an 'SColores. See our '" Anti-Marcion," p. 217, ^(//>., where the ■9i<ycA pretension should stand instead ol precedent.
16 Prsp-scribentes.
'7 Innatum: see above, note 12.
'8 Donee ad Scripturas provocata deficiat exhibitio materix.
'9 Etiamsi quid.
^Origines.
21 Materia.s. There is point in this use of the plural of the con troverted term materia.
"Ceterum.
23lsa. xxxiv. 4; Matt. xxiv. 29; 2 Pet. iii. lo; Rev. vi. 14.
CHAP. XXXVI.]
AGAINST HERMOGENES.
end loses locality. In like manner David says, " The heavens, the works of Thine hands, shall themselves perish. For even as a vesture shall He change them, and they shall be changed."' Now to be changed is to fall from that primitive state which they lose whilst undergoing the change. "And the stars too shall fall from heaven, even as a fig-tree casteth her green figs* when she is shaken of a mighty wind."^ "The moun- tains shall melt like wax at the presence of the Lord;"* that is, "when He riseth to shake terribly the earth." s " But I will dry up the pools;"* and "they shall seek water, and they shall find none."'' Even "the sea shall be no more."* Now if any person should go so far as to suppose that all these passages ought to be spiritually interpreted, he will yet be unable to deprive them of the true accomplishment of those issues which must come to pass just as they have been written. For all figures of speech necessarily arise out of real things, not out of chimerical ones; because nothing is capable of imparting any- thing of its own for a similitude, except it actually be that very thing which it imparts in the similitude. I return therefore to the principle 9 which defines that all things which have come from nothing shall return at last to nothing. For God would not have made any perishable thing out of what was eternal, that is to say, out of Matter; neither out of greater things would He have created inferior ones, to whose character it would be more agreeable to produce greater things out of inferior ones, — in other words, what is eternal out of what is perishable. This is the promise He makes even to our flesh, and it has been His will to deposit within us this pledge of His own vir- tue and power, in order that we may believe that He has actually'" awakened the uni- verse out of nothing, as if it had been steeped in death," in the sense, of course, of its pre- vious non-existence for the purpose of its coming into existence.'* CHAP. XXXV. — CONTRADICTORY PROPOSITIONS ADVANCED BY HERMOGENES RESPECTING MAT- TER AND ITS QUALITIES.
As regards all other points touching Matter, a Acerba sua " grosses suos " (Rigalt.).
So our marginal reading.
4Ps. xcvii. 5.
8 Etiam mare hactenus, Rev. xxi. i.
9 Causam. 10 Etiam.
" Emortuara.
'=In hoc, ut esset. Contrasted with the " non erat " of the pre- vious sentence, this roust be the meaning, as if it were " ut (ieret."
32 although there is no necessity why we should treat of them (for our first pomt was the manifest proof of its existence), we must for all that pursue our discussion just as if it did exist, in order that its non-existence may be the more apparent, when these other points concerning it prove inconsistent with each other, and in order at the same time that Hermogenes may acknowledge his own contra- dictory positions. Matter, says he, at first sight seems to us to be incorporeal; but when examined by the ligJit of right reason, it is found to be neither corporeal nor incorporeal. What is this right reason of yours, '' which declares nothing right, that is, nothing certain? For, if I mistake not, everything must of necessity be either corporeal or incorporeal (although I may for the moment '^ allow that there is a certain incorporeality in even sub- stantial things, '5 although their very sub- stance is the body of particular things); at all events, after the corporeal and the incorporeal there is no third state. But if it be contended '^ that there is a third state discovered by this right reason of Hermogenes, which makes Matter neither corporeal nor incorporeal, (I ask,) Where is it? what sort of thing is it? what is it called? what is its description?
what is it understood to be? This only has his reason declared, that Matter is neither corporeal nor incorporeal.
CHAP. XXXVI. OTHER ABSURD THEORIES RE- SPECTING MATTER AND ITS INCIDENTS EX- POSED IN AN IRONICAL STRAIN. MOTION IN MATTER. hermogenes' CONCEITS RESPECT- ING IT.
But see what a contradiction he next ad- vances ''' (or perhaps some other reason '* occurs to him), when he declares that Matter is partly corporeal and partly incorporeal. Then must Matter be considered (to embrace) both conditions, in order that it may not have either? For it will be corporeal, and incor- poreal in spite of'^ the declaration of that antithesis,*" which is plainly above giving any 13 Ista.
'4 Interim.
'5 De substantiis duntaxat.
16 Age nunc sit: " But grant that there is this third state."
«7 Subicit.
•8 Other than " the right reasott " above named.
'9 Adversus.
s'^The original, "Adversus renuntiationem reciprocationis illius," is an obscure expression. Oehler, who gives tfiis reading in his edition, after the editio f>rinceps^ renders the term " reciproca- tionis" by the phrase " negative conversion" of the proposition that Matter is corporeal and incorporeal (q. d. " Matter is neithel corporeal nor incorporeal"). Instead, however, of the reading "reciprocationis," Oehler would gladly read " rectse rationis," after most of the editions. He thinks that this allusion to " the right reason," of which Hermogenes boasted, and of which the ab- surd conclusion is exposed in the context, very well suits the sar- castic style of TertuUian. If this, the general reading, be adopted, we must render the whole clause thus: " For it will be corporeal and incorporeal, in spite of the declaration of that right reason (of Hermogenes), which is plainly enough above giving any reason," etc. etc.
AGAINST HERMOGENES.
[chap. XXXVII.
reason for its opinion, just as that "other reason" also was. Now, by the corporeal part of Matter, he means that of which bodies are created; but by the incorporeal part of Matter, he means its uncreated ' motion. If, says he. Matter were simply a body, there would appear to be in it nothing incorporeal, that is, (no) motion; if, on the other hand, it had been wholly incorporeal, no body could be formed out of it. What a peculiarly right ^ reason have we here! Only if you make your sketches as right as you make your reason, Hermogenes, no painter would be more stupid ^ than yourself. For who is going to allow you to reckon motion as a moiety of Matter, seeing that it is not a substantial thing, because it is not corporeal, but an accident (if indeed it be even that) of a substance and a body? Just as action * is, and impulsion, just as a slip is, or a fall, so is motion. When anything moves even of itself, its motion is the result of impulse; ^ but cer- tainly it is no part of its substance in your sense,* when you make motion the incorpo- real part of matter. All things, indeed,' have motion — either of themselves as animals, or of others as inanimate things; but yet we should not say that either a man or a stone was both corporeal and incorporeal because they had both a body and motion: we should say rather that all things have one form of simple * corporeality, which is the essential quality « of substance. If any incorporeal incidents accrue to them, as actions, or pas- sions, or functions,'" or desires, we do not reckon these parts as of the things. How then does he contrive to assign an integral portion of Matter to motioti, which does not pertain to substance, but to a certain condition " of sub- stance? Is not this incontrovertible? '- Sup- pose you had taken it into your head '^ to represent matter as immoveable, would then the immobility seem to you to be a moiety of its form? Certainly not. Neither, in like manner, could motion. But I shall be at lib- erty to speak of motion elsewhere.'''