CHAP. XXIV. DIVINE STRICTURES ON VARIOUS HERETICS DESCRIED IN VARIOUS PASSAGES OF PROPHETICAL SCRIPTURE. THOSE WHO ASSAIL THE TRUE DOCTRINE OF THE ONE LORD JESUS CHRIST, BOTH GOD AND DEMNED.
MAN, THUS CON- For when Isaiah hurls denunciation against our very heretics, especially in his "Woe to them that call evil good, and put darkness for light," ^ he of course sets his mark upon those amongst you ^' who preserve not in the words they employ the light of their true sig- nificance, (by taking care) that the soul should mean only that which is so called, and t\\Q flesh simply that which is confest to our view and 6"^^/ none other than the One who is preached.'^ Having thus Marcion in his prophetic view, he says, " I am God, and there is none else; there is no God beside me.'" '^ And when in another passage he says, in like manner, " Be- fore me there was no God," "^ he strikes at those inexplicable genealogies of the Valentin- ian.^ons. Again, there is an answer to Ebion in the Scripture: " Born, =5 not of blood, nor '4 Magis.
»5 Utique.
'6 Nuptialem passionem.
'7 Epiphanius (Haer. xx.x. 30) quotes from the apocryphal Ezekiel this passage: Teferoi i\ ha.\i.aX\.<i^ (tai ipo\><j\.v — ov titoKiv. So Clem. Alex. Siromtiia, vii. Oehler.
'^Ceterum.
=> Istos.
22 Praidicatur.
25 John i. 13. Tertullian's quotation is, as usual, in the singular, " natus" ON THE FLESH OF CHRIST.
[chap. XX ■of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." In like manner, in the passage, "If even an angel of heaven preach unto you any other gospel than that which we have preached unto you, let him be anathema," ' he calls attention to the artful influence of Philumene,^ the virgin friend of Apelles. Surely he is antichrist who denies that Christ has come in the flesh. ^ By declaring that His flesh is simply and absolutely true, and taken in the plain sense of its own nature, the Scripture aims a blow at all who make dis- tinctions in it.* In the same way, also, when it defines the very Christ to be but one, it shakes the fancies of those v/ho exhibit a multiform Christ, who make Christ to be one being and Jesus another, — representing one as escaping out of the midst of the crowds, and the other as detained by them; one as ap- pearing on a soHtary mountain to three com- panions, clothed with glory in a cloud, the other as an ordinary man holding intercourse with all,s one as magnanimous, but the other as timid; lastly, one as suffering death, the other as risen again, by means of which event they maintain a resurrection of their own also, only in another flesh. Happily, however. He who suffered "will come again from heaven,"* and by all shall He be seen, who rose again from the dead. They too who crucified Him shall see and acknowledge Him; that is to say, His very flesh, against which they spent their fury, and without which it would be impossible for Himself either to exist or to be seen; so » Comp. de Preiser. Haret. c. xxx. p, 257, supra.
4 Disceptatores ejus.
that they must blush with shame who affirm that His flesh sits in heaven void of sensation, like a sheath only, Christ being withdrawn from it; as well as those who (maintain) that His flesh and soul are just the same thing,^ or else that His soul is all that exists,® but that His flesh no longer lives.
CHAP. XXV. — CONCLUSION. THIS TREATISE FORMS A PREFACE TO THE OTHER WORK, ** ON THE RESURRECTION OF THE FLESH," PROVING THE REALITY OF THE FLESH WHICH WAS TRULY BORN, AND DIED, AND ROSE AGAIN.
Bnt let this suffice on our present subject; for I think that by this time proof enough has been adduced of the flesh in Christ having both been born of the virgin, and being human in its nature. And this discussion alone might have been sufficient, without en- countering the isolated opinions which have been raised from different quarters. We have, however, challenged these opinions to the test, both of the arguments which sustain them, and of the Scriptures which are appealed to, — and this we have done ex abmidanti; so that we have, by showing what the flesh of Christ was, and whence it was derived, also prede- termined the question, against all objectors, of what that flesh was not. The resurrection, however, of our own flesh will have to be maintained in another little treatise, and so bring to a close this present one, which serves as a general preface, and which will pave the way for the approaching subject now that it is plain what kind of body that was which rose again in Christ.
7 Tantundem.
8 Tantummodo.
ELUCIDATIONS.
(In the body of a dove, cap. iii. p. 523.)
The learned John Scott, in his invaluable work The Christian Life, ' identifies the glory shed upon the Saviour at his baptism, with that mentioned by Ezekiel (Cap. xliii. 2) and adds: " In this same glorious splendor was Christ arrayed first at his Baptism and after- ward at his Transfiguration...By the Holy Ghost's descending like a Dove, it is not necessary we should understand his descending in the shape or form of a Dove, but that in some glorious form, or appearance, he descended in the same manner as a Dove descends...Came down from above just as a dove with his wings spread forth is observed to do.
ELUCIDATIONS. 54- and lighted upon our Saviour's head. " 1 quote this as the opinion of one of the most learned and orthodox of divines, but not as my own, for I cannot reconcile it, as he strives to do, with St. Luke iii. 22. Compare Justin Martyr, vol. i. p. 243, and note 6, this series. Grotius obser\'es, says Dr. Scott, that in the apocryphal Gospel of the Nazarenes, it is said that at the Baptism of our Lord "a great light shone round about the place."
II.
(His mother and His brethren, cap. vii. p. 527.)
It is not possible that the author of this chapter had ever conceived of the Blessed Virgin otherwise than as " Blessed among women," indeed, but enjoying no especial prerog- ative as the mother of our Lord. He speaks of "denying her" and "putting her away" after He began His Ministry, as He requires His ministers to do, after His example. How extraordinary this language — "the repudiation of carnal relationship. " According to our author, never charged with heresy on this point, the high rewards of the holy Mary, in the world to come will be those due to her faith, not to the blessing of " her breasts and of her womb." Christ designates those as " more blessed," who hear His word and keep it. This the Blessed Virgin did pre-eminently, and herein was her own greater blessedness; that is, (our author shews) her crown of glory depends chiefly, like that of other saints, o» her faith and works, not on her mere Maternity.
VI.
ON THE RESURRECTION OF THE FLESH.
THE HERETICS AGAINST WHOM THIS WORK IS DIRECTED, WERE THE SAME WHO MAINTAINED THAT THE DEMIURGE, OR THE GOD WHO CREATED THIS WORLD AND GAVE THE MOSAIC DISPENSATION, WAS OPPOSED TO THE SUPREME GOD. HENCE THEY ATTACHED AN IDEA OF INHERENT CORRUPTION AND WORTHLESSNESS TO ALL HIS WORKS —AMONGST THE REST, TO THE FLESH OR BODY OF MAN; AFFIRM- ING THAT IT COULD NOT RISE AGAIN, AND THAT THE SOUL ALONE WAS CAPABLE OF INHERITING IMMORTALITY.'
[TRANSLATED BY DR. HOLMES.]
CHAP. I. — THE DOCTRINE OF THE RESURREC- TION OF THE BODY BROUGHT TO LIGHT BY THE GOSPEL. THE FAINTEST GLIMPSES OF SOMETHING LIKE IT OCCASIONALLY MET WITH IN HEATHENISM. INCONSISTENCIES OF PAGAN TEACHING.
The resurrection of the dead is the Chris- tian's trust. =" By it we are believers. To the behef of this (article of the faith) truth compels us — that truth which God reveals, but the crowd derides, which supposes that nothing /will survive after death. And yet they do honour 3 to their dead, and that too in the most expensive way according to their be- quest, and with the daintiest banquets which the seasons can produce," on the presumption that those whom they declare to be incapable of all perception still retain an appetite.^ But (let the crowd deride): I on my side must de- ride it still more, especially when it burns up its dead with harshest inhumanity, only to pamper them immediately afterwards with gluttonous satiety, using the selfsame fires •See Bp. Kaye, On TerUdlian, p. 256. A full examination of the tenets of these Gnostic heretics occurs in our author's Treatise against Marcion. An able review of Tertullian's line of thought in this work on the resurrection occurs in Neander's A ntignostikus^ Bohn's translation, ii. 478-486. [There is a decisive ebullition of Montanistic fanaticism in cap. xi., and in the second chapter there is a reference to the De Came Christi. Date this treatise circa 2 Fiducia.
3 Parentant.
4 Pro temporibus esculentoruni.
5 Etiam desiderar" 35 to honour them and to insult them. What piety is that which mocks its victims with cruelty? Is it sacrifice or insult (which the crowd offers), when it burns its offerings to those it has already burnt?* But the wise, too, join with the vulgar crowd in their opinion sometimes. There is nothing after death, according to the school of Epicurus. After death all things come to an end, even death itself, says Seneca to like effect. It is satis- factory, however, that the no less important philosophy of Pythagoras and Empedocles, and the Plantonists, take the contrary view, and declare the soul to be immortal; affirming, morever, in a way which most nearly ap- proaches (to our own doctrine), ^ that the soul actually returns into bodies, although not the same bodies, and not even those of human beings inavariably: thus Euphorbus is sup- posed to have passed into Phythagoras, and Homer into a peacock. They firmly pro-w nounced the soul's renewal^ to be in a body,' (deeming it) more tolerable to change the quality (of the corporeal state) than to deny it wholly: they at least knocked at the door of truth, although they entered not. Thus the world, with all its errors, does not ignore the resurrection of the dead.
*• Cum crematis cremat.
7 Adhuc proxime • " Christianse scilicet doctrinae." 0ehle» SRecidivatum.
9 Corporalem.
ON THE RESURRECTION OF THE FLESH.
[chap. II.
CHAP. 11. THE JEWISH SADDUCEES A LINK BE- TWEEN THE PAGAN PHILOSOPHERS AND THE HERETICS ON THIS DOCTRINE. ITS FUNDA- MENTAL IMPORTANCE ASSERTED. THE SOUL FARES BETTER THAN THE BODY, IN HERETI- CAL ESTIMATION, AS TO ITS FUTURE STATE. ITS EXTINCTION, HOWEVER, N.'ASHELD BY ONE LUC AN.
Since there is even within the confines of God's Church^ a sect which is more nearly alhed to the Epicureans than to the prophets, an opportunity is afforded us of knowing - what estimate Christ forms of the (said sect, even the) Sadducees. For to Christ was it reserved to lay bare everything which be- fore was concealed: to impart certainty to doubtful points; to accomplish those of which men had had but a foretaste; to give present reality to the objects of prophecy; and to fur- nish not only by Himself, but actually in Him- self, certain proofs of the resurrection of the dead. It is, however, against other Sadducees that we have now to prepare ourselves, but still partakers of their doctrine. For instance, they allow a moiety of the resurrection; that is, simply of the soul, despising the flesh, just as they also do the Lord of the flesh Himself. No other persons, indeed, refuse to concede to the substance of the body its recovery from death, 3 than the heretical inventors of a second deity. Driven then, as they are, to give a different dispensation to Christ, so that He may not be accounted as belonging to the Creator, they have achieved their first error in the artic/e of His very flesh; contending with Marcion and Basilides that it possessed no reality; or else holding, after the heretical tenets of Valentinus, and according to Ap- elles, that it had qualities peculiar to itself. And so it follows that they shut out from all recovery from death that substance of which they say that Christ did not partake, con- fidently assuming that it furnishes the strong- est presumption against the resurrection, since the flesh is already risen in Christ. Hence it is that we have ourselves previously issued our volume On the flesh of Christ; in which we both furnish proofs of its reality, ■» in opposi- tion to the idea of its being a vain phantom; and claim for it a human nature without any peculiarity of condition — such a nature as has marked out Christ to be both man and the Son of man. For when we prove Him to be invested with the flesh and in a bodily condi- tion, we at the same time refute heresy, by establishing the rule that no other being than » Apud Deum. 'Sciemus. 3Salutem. ■•Eam solidara.
the Creator must be believed to be God, since we show that Christ, in whom God is plainly discerned, is precisely of such a nature as the Creator promised that He should be. Being thus refuted touching God as the Creator, and Christ as the Redeemer of the flesh, they will at once be defeated also on the resurrection of the flesh. No procedure, indeed, can be more reasonable. And we affirm that controversy with heretics should in most cases be con- ducted in this way. For due method requires that conclusions should always be drawn from the most important premises, in order that there be a prior agreement on the essential point, by means of which the particular ques- tion under review may be said to have been determined. Hence it is that the heretics, from their conscious weakness, never conduct discussion in an orderly manner. They are well aware how hard is their task in insinuating the existence of a second god, to the disparage- j ment of the Creator of the world, who is] known to all men naturally by the testimony of His works, who is before all others in the mysteries s of His being, and is especially manifested in the prophets;* then, under the pretence of considering a more urgent inquiry, namely man's own salvation — a question which transcends all others in its importance — they begin with doubts about the resurrection; for there is greater difficulty in believing the res- urrection of the flesh than the oneness of the Deity. In this way, after they have deprived the discussion of the advantages of its logical order, and have embarrassed it with doubtful insinuations 7 in disparagement of the flesh, they gradually draw their argument to the re- ception of a second god after destroying and changing the very ground of our hopes. For when once a man is fallen or removed from the sure hope which he had placed in the Creator, he is easily led av/ay to the object of a different hope, whom however of his own accord he can hardly help suspecting. Now it is by a discrepancy in the promises that a difference of gods is insinuated. How many do we thus see drawn into the net, vanquished on the resurrection of the flesh, before they could carry their point on the oneness of the Deity! In respect, then, of the heretics, we have shown with what weapons we ought to meet them. And indeed we have already en- countered them in treatises severally directed against them: on the one only God and His Christ, in our work against Marcion,^ on the Lord's flesh, in our book against the four sin sacramentis.
* In prxdicationibus: " in the declarations of the prophets." 7 Scrupulis.
• See books ii. and iii. of ovir A nti-Maroion, CHAT, in.]
ON THE RESURRECTION OF THE FLESH.
heresies,' for the special purpose of opening the way to the present inquiry: so that we have now only to discuss the resurrection of the flesh, (treating it) just as if it were uncertain in regard to ourselves also, that is, in the system of the Creator.- Because many persons are uneducated; still more are of faltering faith, and several are weak-minded: these will have to be instructed, directed, strengthened, inasmuch as the very oneness of the Godhead will be defended along with the maintenance of our doctrine. 3 For if the resurrection ^f the flesh be denied, that prime article of the faith is shaken; if it be asserted, that is es- tablished. There is no need, I suppose, to treat of the soul's safety; for nearly all the heretics, in whatever way they conceive of it, certainly refrain from denying that. We may ignore a certain Lucan,"* who does not spare even this part of our nature, which he follows Aristotle in reducing to dissolution, and sub- stitutes some other thing in lieu of it. Some third nature it is which, according to him, is to rise again, neither soul nor flesh; in other w^ords, not man, but a bear perhaps — for in- stance, Lucan himself.^ Even he* has re- ceived from us a copious notice in our book on the entire condition of the soul,^ the especial immortality of which we there maintain, whilst we also both acknowledge the dissolution of the flesh alone, and emphatically assert its restitution. Into the body of that work were collected whatever points we elsewhere had to reserve from the pressure of incidental causes. For as it is my custom to touch some ques- tions but lightly on their first occurrence, so I am obliged also to postpone the consideration of them, until the outline can be filled in with complete detail, and the deferred points be taken up on their own merits.
CHAP. III. — SOME TRUTHS HELD t EN BY THE HEATHEN. THEY WERE, HOWEVER, MORE OFTEN WRONG BOTH IN RELIGIOUS OPINIONS AND IN MORAL PRACTICE. THE HEATHEN NOT TO BE FOLLOWED IN THEIR IGNORANCE OF THE CHRISTIAN MYSTERY. THE HERETICS PERVERSELY PRONE TO FOLLOW THEM.
One may no doubt be wise in the things of God, even from one's natural powers, but only in witness to the truth, not in maintenance of • He means the De Came Chyisti.
'■' Tanquara penes nos quoque incerta, id est penes Creatorem. This obscure clause is very variously read. One reading, approved by Fr. Junius, has: " Tanquam penes nos incertum, dum sit quoque certum penes Creatorem," q. d., " As a subject full of un- certainty as respects ourselves, although of an opposite character in relation to the Creator; ' whatever that may mean.
3 Hoc latere.
4 Compare Adv. Oniites Hcereses, c. vi.
5 Varro's words help us to understand this rough joke: " Ursi I.ucana origo" ^ic. (De Ling. Lat. v. loo.)
6 Iste: rather ^ivs, subject than his person. 7 i.e. the De Aninta.
error; (only) when one acts in accordance with, not in opposition to, the divine dispensation. For some things are known even by nature: the immortality of the soul, for instance, is held by many; the knowledge of our God is possessed by all. I may use, therefore, the opinion of a Plato, when he declares, " Every soul is immortal." I may use also the con- science of a nation, when it attests the God of gods. I may, in like manner, use all the other intelligences of our common nature, when they pronounce God to be a judge. " God sees, " (say they); and, " I commend you to God." * But when they say, "What has undergone death is dead, " and, " Enjoy life whilst you live," and, " After death all things come to an end, even death itself; " then I must remember both that " the heart of man is ashes, "» ac- cording to the estimate of God, and that the very "wisdom of the world is foolishness, " (as the inspired word) pronounces it to be." Then, if even the heretic seek refuge in the depraved thoughts of the vulgar, or the imag- inations of the world, I must say to him: Part company with the heathen, O heretic! for al- though you are all agreed in imagining a God, yet while you do so in the name of Christ, so long as you deem yourself a Christian, you are a different man from a heathen: give him back his own views of things, since he does not himself learn from yours. Why lean upon a blind guide, if you have eyes of your own? Why be clothed by one who is naked, if you have put on Christ? Why use the shield of another, when the apostle gives you armour of your own? It would be better for him to learn from you to acknowledge the resurrection of the flesh, than for you from him to deny it; because if Christians must needs deny it, it would be sufficient if they did so from their own knowledge, without any instruction from the ignorant multitude. He, therefore, will not be a Christian who shall deny this doctrine which is confessed by Christians; denying it, moreover, on grounds which are adopted by a man who is not a Christian. Take away, in- deed, from the heretics the wisdom which they share with the heathen, and let them support their inquiries from the Scriptures alone: they will then be unable to keep their ground. For that which commends men's common sense is its very simplicity, and its participation in the same feelings, and its community of opinions; and it is deemed to be all the more trustworthy, inasmuch as its definitive statements are naked and open, and known to all. Divine reason, on the contrary, lies in the very pith and mar- 8 Compare the De Test. A nim. ii., and De A nim. xlii.
9 Isa. xliv. 2o.
ON THE RESURRECTION OF THE FLESH.
[chap. v.
row of things, not on the surface, and very often is at variance with appearances.
CHAP. IV. HEATHENS AND HERETICS ALIKE IN THEIR VILIFICATION OF THE FLESH AND ITS FUNCTIONS. THE ORDINARY CAVILS AGAINST THE FINAL RESTITUTION OF SO WEAK AND IGNOBLE A SUBSTANCE.
Hence it is that heretics start at once from this point,' from which they sketch the first draft of their dogmas, and afterwards add the details, being well aware how easily men's minds are caught by its influence, (and ac- tuated) by that community of human sentiment which is so favourable to their designs. Is there anything else that you can hear of from the heretic, as also from the heathen, earlier in time or greater in extent? Is not (their burden) from the beginning and everywhere i an invective against the flesh — against its ori- gin, against its substance, against the casual- ties and the invariable end which await it; un- clean from its first formation of the dregs of the ground, uncleaner afterwards from the mire of its own seminal transmission; worth- less,' weak, covered with guilt, laden with misery, full of trouble; and after all this record of its degradation, dropping into its original earth and the appellation of a corpse, and destined to dwindle away even from this ^ loathsome name into none henceforth at all — into the very death of all designation? Now you are a shrewd man, no doubt: will you then persuade yourself, that after this flesh has been withdrawal from sight, and touch, and memory, it can never be rehabilitated from corruption to integrity, from a shattered to a solid state, from an empty to a full condition, from nothing at all to something — the devouring fires, and the waters of the sea, and the maws of beasts, and the crops of birds and the stomachs of fishes, and time's own great paunch'* itself, of course yielding it all up again? Shall the same flesh which has fallen to decay be so ex- pected to recover, as that the lame, and the one-eyed, and the blind, and the leper, and the palsied shall come back again, although there can be no pleasure in returning to their old condition? Or shall they be whole, and so have to fear exposure to such sufferings? What, in that case, (must we say) of the con- sequences of resuming the flesh? Will it again be subject to all its present wants, es- pecially meats and drinks? Shall we have with our lungs to float (in air or water), s and ' Of the resurrection of the body.
= Frivolac.
3 Isto.
4Gula.
S Natandum pulmonibus.
suffer pain in our bowels, and with organs of shame to feel no shame, and with all our limbs to toil and labour? Must there again be ulcers, and wounds, and fever, and gout, and once more the wishing to die? Of course these will be the longings incident on the recovery of the flesh, only the repetition of desires to es- cape out of it. Well now, we have (stated) all this in very subdued and delicate phrases, as suited to the character of our style; but (would you know) how great a licence of unseemly language these men actually use, you must test them in their conferences, whether they be heathens or heretics.
CHAP. V. SOME CONSIDERATIONS IN REPLY EULOGISTIC OF THE FLESH. IT WAS CREATED BY GOD. THE BODY OF MAN WAS, IN FACT, PREVIOUS TO HIS SOUL.