1 [Elucidation XI J 2 [Elucidation XII.]
56 ELUCIDATIONS.
ELUCIDATIONS. I.
(Arrangement, p. 4, stipra.)
The arrangement I have adopted in editing these Edinburgh Translations of Tertullian is a practical one. It will be found logical and helpful to the student, who is referred to the Prefatory pages of this volume for an Elucidation of the difficulties, with which any arrange- ment of these treatises is encumbered. ¥or, firsf, an attempt to place them in chronological order is out of the question;' a.n<i, seco?id, all efforts to separate precisely the Orthodox from the Montanistic or Montanist works of our author have hitherto defied the acumen of critics. It would be mere empiricism for me to attempt an original classification in the face of questions which even experts have been unable to determine.
If we bear in mind, however, a few guiding facts, we shall see that difficulties are less than might appear, assuming our object to be a practical one. (i.) Only four of these essays were written against Orthodoxy; (2.) Jive more are reckoned as wholly uncertain, which amounts to saying that they are not positively heretical. (3.) Ag3xn,Jive are colourless, as to Montanism, and hence should be reputed Orthodox. (4.) Of others, written after the influences of Montanism had, more or less, tainted his doctrine, the whole are yet valuable and some are noble defences of the Catholic Faith. (5.) Finally eight or ten of his treatises were written while he was a Catholic, and are precious contributions to the testimony of the Primitive Church.
From these facts, we may readily conclude that the mass of Tertullian's writings is Ortho- dox. Some of them are to be read with caution; others, again, must be rejected for their heresy; but yet all are most instructive historically, and as defining even by errors "the faith once delivered to the Saints." I propose to note those which require caution as we pass them in review. Those written against the Church are classed by them- selves, at the end of the list, and all the rest may be read with confidence. A most interesting inquiry arises in connection with the quotations from Scripture to be found in our author. Did a Latin version exist in his day, or does he translate from the Greek of the New Testament and the lxx? A paradoxical writer (Semler) contends that Tertullian "never used a Greek ms." (see Kaye, p. 106.) But Tertullian's rugged Latin betrays everywhere his familiarity with Greek idioms and forms of thought. He wrote, also, in Greek, and there is no reason to doubt that he knew the Greek Scriptures primarily, if he knew any Greek whatever. Possibly we owe to Tertullian the prbnordia of the Old African Latin Versions, some of which seem to have contained the disputed text I. John V. 7; of which more when we come to the Praxeas. For the present in the absence of defi- nite evidence we must infer that Tertullian usually translated from the lxx, and from the originals of the New Testament. But Mosheim thinks the progress of the Gospel in the West was now facilitated by the existence of Latin Versions. Observe, also, Kaye's im- portant note, p. 293, and his reference to Lardner, Cred. xxvii. 19.
II.
(Address to Magistrates, cap. i., p. 17.)
The Apology comes first in order, on logical grounds. It is classed with our author's orthodox works by Neander, and pronounced colourless by Kaye. It is the noblest of his 1 ELUCIDATIONS. 57 productions in its purpose and spirit, and it falls in with the Primitive System of Apologetics. I have placed next in order to it several treatises, mostly unblemished, which are of the same character; which defend the cause of Christians against Paganism, against Gentile Philosophy, and against Judaism; closing this portion by the two books Ad Nationes, which may be regarded as a recapitulation of the author's arguments, especially those to be found in the Apology. In these successive works, as compared with those of Justin Martyr, we obtain a fair view of the progressive relations of the Church with the Roman Empire and with divers antagonistic systems in the East and West.
III. (History of Christians, cap. ii., p. 18.)
The following Chronological outline borrowed from the Benedictines and from Bishop Kaye, will prove serviceable here.'
TertuIHan born {circa) A.D. 150.
" ordained presbyter {circa).. 192.
" lapsed {circa) 200.
" deceased (extreme surmise)...240.
The Imperial history of his period may be thus arranged: Birth of Caracalla A.D, 188.
Reign of Severus 193.
Defeat of Niger 195.
Caracalla made a Ccssar,, 196.
Capture of Byzantium 196.
Defeat of Albinus, 197.
Geta made a Qrsar...198.
Caracalla called Augustus...•••...198.
Caracalla associated in the Empire 198.
War against the Parthians 198.
Severus returns from the war...203.
Celebration of the Secular Games...« 204.
Plautianus put to death {circa) 205.
GtlzcaWtd Augustus 208.
War in Britain 208.
Wall of Severus 210.
Death of Severus 211.
IV.
(Tiberius, capp. v. and xxiv., pp. 22 and 35.)
A fair examination of what has been said on this subject, pro and con, may be found in Kaye's TertuIHan,'' pp. 102-105. ^"^ his abundant candour this author leans to the doubters, but in stating the case he seems to me to fortify the position of Lardner and Mosheim. What the brutal Tiberius may have thought or done with respect to Pilate's report concerning the holy victim of his judicial injustice is of little importance to the believer. Nevertheless, as matter of history it deserves attention. Great stress is to be placed on the fact that Ter- tuUian was probably a jurisconsult, familiar with the Roman archives, and influenced by ■ Kaye (following L" Art dc verifier les Dates) pp. ii and 456. 'My references are to the Third Edition, London, Rivingtons, 1845.
58 ELUCIDATIONS.
them in his own acceptance of Divine Truth. It is not supposable that such a man would have hazarded his bold appeal to the records, in remonstrating with the Senate and in the very faces of the Emperor and his colleagues, had he not known that the evidence was irrefragable.
The darkness at the Crucifixion, cap. xxi., p. 35.), Kaye disappoints us (p. 150) in his slight notice of this most interesting subject With- out attempting to discuss the story of Phlegon and other points which afford Gibbon an opportunity for misplaced sneering, such as even a Pilate would have rebuked, while it may be well to recall the exposition of Milman,' at the close of Gibbon's fifteenth chapter, I must express my own preference for another view. This will be found candidly summed up and stated, in the Speaker's Commentary, in the concise note on St. Matt., xxvii. 45.
(Numbers of the Faithful, cap. xxxvii., p. 45.)
Kaye, as usual, gives this vexed question a candid survey.' Making all allowances, however, I accept the conjecture of some reputable authorities, that there were 2,000,000 of Christians, in the bounds of the Roman Empire at the close of the Second Century. So mightily grew the testimony of Jesus and prevailed. When we reflect that only a century intervened between the times of Tertullian and the conversion of the Roman Emperor, it is not easy to regard our author's language as merely that of fei-vid genius and of rhetorical hyperbole. He could not have ventured upon exaggeration without courting scorn as well as defeat. What he afifirms is probable in the nature of the case. Were it otherwise, then the conditions, which, in a single century rendered it possible for Constantine to effect the greatest revolution in mind and manners that has ever been known among men, would be a miracle compared with which that of his alleged Vision of the Cross sinks into insignifi- cance. To this subject it will be necessary to recur hereafter.
VII.
(Christian usages, cap. xxxix., p. 46.)
A candid reviisw of the matters discussed in this chapter will be found in Kaye (pp. 146, 209.) The important fact is there clearly stated that " the primitive Christians scrupulously complied with the decree pronounced by the Apostles at Jerusalem in abstaining from things strangled and from blood" (Acts xv. 20). On this subject consult the references given in the Speaker's Commentary, ad locum. The Greeks, to their honour, still maintain this prohibition, but St. Augustine's great authority relaxed the Western scruples on this matter, for he regarded it is a decree of temporary obligation, while the Hebrew and Gentile Chris- tians were in peril of misunderstanding and estrangement. ^ On the important question as to the cessation of miracles Kaye takes a somewhat original position. But see his interesting discussion and that of the late Professor Hey, in Kaye's Tertullian^ pp. 80-102, 151-161. I do not think writers on these subjects have sufficiently distinguished between 7niracles properly so called, and prmndcnces vouchsafed in answer to prayer. There was no miracle in the case of the Thundering Legion, assuming the story to be true; and I dare to affirm that marked answers to prayer, \>y providential interpositions, ' In his edition of The Decline and Fall, Vol. I., p. 589, American reprint.
3Ep. ad Faust, xxxii. 13. and see Conybeare and Howson.
ELUCIDATIONS. 59 but wholly distinct from miraculous agencies, have never ceased among those who " ask in the Son's Name." Such interpositions are oittn preternatural only; that is, they economize certain powers which, though natural in themselves, lie outside of the System of Nature with which we happen to be familiar. This distinction has been overlooked.
VIII.
(Multitudes, cap. xl., p. 47.)
Note the words — "'multitudes to a single beast." Can it be possible that Tertullian would use such language to the magistrates, if he knew that such sentences were of rare occurrence? The disposition of our times to minimize the persecutions of our Christian forefathers calls upon us to note such references, all the more important because occurring obiter and mentioned as notorious. Note also, the closing chapter of this Apology, and reference to the outcries of the populace, in Cap. xxxv.' See admirable remarks on the benefits derived by the Church from the sufferings of Christian martyrs, with direct reference to Tertullian, Wordsworth, Church Hist, to Council of Niccea^ cap. xxiv., p. 374.
IX.
(Christian manners, cap. xlii., p. 49.)
A Study of the manners of Christians, in the Ante-Nicene Age, as sketched by the un- sparing hand of Tertullian, will convince any unprejudiced mind of the mighty power of the Holy Ghost, in framing such characters out of heathen originals. When, under Montanistic influences our severely ascetic author complains of the Church's corruptions, and turns inside-out the whole estate of the faithful, we see all that can be pressed on the other side; but, this very important chapter must be borne in mind, together with the closing sentence of chap, xliv., as evidence that whatever might be said by a rigid disciplinarian, the Church, as compared with our day, was still a living embodiment of Philip, iv. 8.
X.
(Paradise, cap. xlvii., p. 52.)
See Kaye, p. 248. Our author seems not always consistent with himself in his references to the Places of departed spirits. Kaye thinks he identifies Paradise with the Heaven of the Most High, in one place (the De Exhort. Cast., xiii.) where he probably confuses the Apostle's ideas, in Galat. v., 12, and Ephes. v., 5. Commonly, however, though he is not consistent with himself, this would be his scheme: — 1. The hiferi, or Hades, where the soul of Dives was in one continent and that of Lazarus in another, with a gulf between. Our author places " Abraham's bosom " in Hades.
2. Paradise. In Hades, but in a superior and more glorious region. This more blessed abode was opened to the souJs of the martyrs and other greater saints, at our Lord's descent into the place of the dead. After the General Resurrection and Judgment, there remain: 1. Gehetma, for the lost, prepared for the devil and his angels.
2. The Heaven of Heavens, the eternal abode of the righteous, in the vision of the Lord and His Eternal Joy.
Tertullian's variations on this subject will force us to recur to it hereafter; but, here it may be noted that the confusions of Latin Christianity received their character in this par- ticular, from the genius of our author. Augustine caught from him a certain indecision ' Compare Kaye on Mosheim, p. 107.
6o ELUCIDATIONS.
about the terms and places connected with the state of the departed which has continued, to this day, to perplex theologians in the West. Taking advantage of such confusions, the/ stupendous Roman system of "Purgatory" was fabricated in the middle ages; but thei Greeks never accepted it, and it differs fundamentally from what the earlier Latin Fathers,^ including TertuUian, have given us as speculations.
V XI.
(The Leo and the Leno, cap. 1., p. 55.)
Here we find the alliterative and epigrammatic genius of TertuUian anticipating a similar poetic charm in Augustine. The Christian maid or matron preferred the Leo to the leno; to be devoured rather than to be debauched. Our author wrests a tribute to the chastity of Christian women from the cruelty of their judges, who recognizing this fact, were accustomed as a refinement of their injustice to give sentence against them, refusing the mercy of a horrible death, by committing them to the ravisher: " damnando Christianam ad lenonem potius quam ad leonem."
XIL (The Seed of the Church, cap. 1., p. 55.)
Kaye has devoted a number of his pages ' to the elucidation of this subject, not only showing the constancy of the martyrs, but illustrating the fact that Christians, like St. Paul, were forced to " die daily," even when they were not subjected to the fiery trial. He who confessed himself a Christian made himself a social outcast. All manner of outrages and wrongs could be committed against him with impunity. Rich men, who had joined them- selves to Christ,^ were forced to accept " the spoiling of their goods." Brothers denounced brothers, and husbands their wives; " a man's foes were they of his own household." But the Church triumphed through suffering, and " out of weakness was made strong."
I pp. 129-140. 2 Even under Commodus, vol. ii, p. 598, this series n.
ON IDOLATRY.
[TRANSLATED BY THE REV. S. THELWALL.]
CHAP. I. — WIDE SCOPE OF THE WORD IDOLATRY.
The principal crime of the human race, the highest guilt charged upon the world, the whole procuring cause of judgment, is idola- try.' For, although each single fault retains its own proper feature, although it is destined to judgment under its own proper name also, yet it is marked off under the general account of idolatry. Set aside names, examine works, the idolater is likewise a murderer. Do you inquire whom he has slain? If it contributes ought to the aggravation of the indictment, no stranger nor personal enemy, but his own self. By what snares? Those of his error. By what weapon? The offence done to God. By how many blows? As many as are his idolatries. He who affirms that the idolater perishes not,'' will affirm that the idolater has not committed murder. Further, you may recognize in the same crime ^ adi'Ifery and fornication; for he who serves false gods is doubtless an adulterer '^ of truth, because all falsehood is adultery. So, too, he is sunk in fornication. For who that is a fellow-worker with unclean spirits, does not stalk in general pollution and fornication? And thus it is that the Holy Scriptures s use the designation of fornication in their upbraiding of idolatry.
1 [This solemn sentence vindicates the place I have given to the De Idololatria in the order adopted for this volume. After this and the Apology come three treatises confirming its positions, and vindicating the principles of Christians in conflict with Idolatry, the great generic crime of a world lying in wickedness. These three are the De Spectaciilis, the De Corona and the Ad Scapu- lam. The De Spectaculis was written after this treatise, in which indeed it is mentioned,* but logically it follows, illustrates and en- forces it. Hence my practical plan: which \v\\\ be concluded by a scheme (conjectural in part) of chronological order in which pre- cision is affirmed by all critics to be impossible, but, by which we may reach approximate accuracy, with great advantage. The De Idololatria is free from Montanism. But see Kaye, p. xvi.]
2 Lit., "has not perished," as if the perishing were already complete; as, of course, it is judicially as soon as the guilt is in- curred, though not actually.
3 i.e., in idolatry.
4 A play on the word: we should say, "an adulterator.^'' 5 Oehler refers to Ezek. xxiii.; but many other references might be given— in the Pentateuch and Pialms, for instance.
* CaD. xiii.
The essence of fraud, I take it, is, that any should seize what is another's, or refuse to another his due; and, of course, fraud done toward man is a name of greatest crime. Well, but idolatry does fraud to God, by refusing to Him, and conferring on others, His honours; so that to fraud it also conjoins contumely. But if fraud, just as much as fornication and adultery, entails death, then, in these cases, equally with the former, idolatry stands un- acquitted of the impeachment of murder. After such crimes, so pernicious, so devouring of salvation, all other crimes also, after some manner, and separately disposed in order, find their own essence represented in idolatry. In it also are the concupiscences of the world. For what solemnity of idolatry is without the cir- cumstance of dress and ornament? In it are lascivious7iesses a.id drunkennesses: since it is, for the most part, for the sake of food, and stomach, and appetite, that these solemnities a.'e frequented. In it is unrighteousness. For what more unrighteous than it, which knows not the Father of righteousness? In it also is vanity, since its whole system is vain. In it is mmdacity, for its whole substance is false. Thus it comes to pass, that in idolatry all crimes are detected, and in all crimes idolatry.
Even otherwise, since all faults savour of op- position to God, and there is nothing which savours of opposition to God which is not as- signed to demons and unclean spirits, whose property idols are; doubtless, whoever com- mits a fault is chargeable with idolatry, for he does that which pertains to the proprietors of idols.
CHAP. II. — IDOLATRY IN ITS MORE LIMITED SENSE. ITS COPIOUSNESS.
But let the universal names of crimes with- draw to the specialities of their own works; let idolatry remain in that which it is itself. Sufficient to itself is a name so inimical to God, a substance of crime so copious, which 62 ON IDOLATRY.
[CHAP./i\'.
reaches forth so many branches, diffuses so many veins, that from this nafne, for the greatest part, is drawn the material of ail the modes in which the expansiveness of idolatry has to be foreguarded against by us, since in manifold wise it subverts the servants of God; and this not only when unperceived, but also when cloaked over. Most men simply re- gard idolatry as to be interpreted in these senses alone, viz.: if one burn incense, or immolate a victt?>i, or give a sacrificial banquet, or be bound to some sacred functions or priesthoods; just as if one were to regard adultery as to be accounted in kisses, and in embraces, and in actual fleshly contact; or murder as to be reckoned only in the shed- ding forth of blood, and in the actual taking away of life. But how far wider an extent the Lord assigns to those crimes we are sure: when He defines adultery to consist even in concupiscence,' " if one shall have cast an eye lustfully on," and stirred his soul with im- modest commotion; when He judges murder - to consist even in a word of curse or of re- proach, and in every impulse of anger, and in the neglect of charity toward a brother: just as John teaches, ^ that he who hates his brother is a murderer. Else, both the devil's ingenuity in malice, and God the Lord's in the Discipline by which He fortifies us against the devil's depths,-* would have but limited scope, if we were judged only in such faults as even the heathen nations have decreed punishable. How will our "righteousness abound above that of the Scribes and Phari- sees," as the Lord has prescribed, 5 unless we shall l^ave seen through the abundance of that adversary quality, that is, of?/;«righteousness? But if the head of unrighteousness is idolatry, the first point is, that we be fore-fortified against the abundance of idolatry, while we r-r ognise it not only in its palpable manifesta- t. jns.
CHAP. III. — idolatry: origin and meaning OF THE name.
Idol in ancient times there was none. Be- fore the artificers of this monstrosity had bubbled into being,* temples stood solitary and shrines empty, just as to the present day in some places traces of the ancient practice re- main permanently. Yet idolatry used to be practised, not under that name, but in that function; for even at this day it can be prac- 6" Boiled out," "bubbled out."
tised outside a temple, and without an idol. But when the devil introduced into the world artificers of statues and of images, and of every kind of likenesses, that former rude business of human disaster attained from idols both a name and a development. Thenceforward every art which in any way produces an idol instantly became a fount of idolatry. For it makes no difference whether a moulder cast, or a carver grave, or an embroiderer weave the idol; because neither is it a question of material, whether an idol be formed of gyp- sum, or of colors, or of stone, or of bronze,' or of silver, or of thread. For since even without an idol idolatry is committed, when the idol is there it makes no difference of what kind it be, of what material, or what shape; lest any should think that only to be held an idol which is consecrated in human shape. To establish this point, the interpretation of the word is requisite. Eidcfs, in Greek, sig- nifies form; eidolon, derived diminutively from that, by an equivalent process in our language, makes formling.^ Every fortn or formling, therefore, claims to be called an idol. Hence idolatry \% " all attendance and service about every idol." Hence also, every artificer of an idol is guilty of one and the same crime,' unless, the People '° which con- secrated for itself the likeness of a calf, and not of a man, fell short of incurring the guilt of idolatry."
CHAP. IV. — IDOLS NOT TO BE MADE, MUCH LESS WORSHIPPED. IDOLS AND IDOL-MAKERS IN THE SAME CATEGORY.
God prohibits an idol as much to be made as to be worshipped. In so far as the making what may be worshipped is the prior act, so far is the prohibition to make (if the worship is unlawful) the prior prohibition. For this cause — the eradicating, namely, of the ma- terial of idolatry — the divine law proclaims, " Thou shalt make no idol;" " and by con- joining, " Nor a similitude of the things which are in the heaven, and which are in the earth, and which are in the sea," has interdicted the servants of God from acts of that kind all the universe over. Enoch had preceded, pre- dicting that " the demons, and the spirits of the angelic apostates, '^ would turn into idola- 7 Or, brass.
9 Idolatry, namely.
'o [Capitalized to mark its emphatic sense, i.e., the People of God :::the Jews.]
" See Ex. xxxii.; and compare i Cor. x. 7, where the latter part of Ex. xxxii. 6 is quoted.
"2 Lev. xxvi. I; Ex. xx. 4; Deut. v. 8. It must of course h« borne in mind that TertuUian has defined the meaning of the wori idol in the former chapter, and speaks with reference to that defi- nition.
'3 Compare tie Oratione, c. 23, and de Virg. I'el. c. 7.
CHAP, v.]
ON IDOLATRY.
^3 try all the elements, all the garniture of the universe, all things contained in the heaven, in the sea, in the earth, that they might be consecrated as God, in opposition to God." All things, therefore, does human error wor- ship, except the Founder of all Himself. The images of those things are idols; the conse- cration of the images is idolatry. Whatever guilt idolatry incurs, must necessarily be im- puted to every artificer of every idol. In short, the same Enoch fore-condemns in general menace both idol-worshippers and idol-makers together. And again: "I swear to you, sinners, that against the day of perdi- tion of blood' repentance is being prepared. Ye who serve stones, and ye who make images of gold, and silver, and wood, and stones and clay, and serve phantoms, and demons, and spirits in fanes, ^ and all errors not according to knowledge, shall find no help from them." But Isaiah 3 says, " Ye are witnesses whether there is a God except Me." " And they who mould and carve out at that time were not: all vain! who do that which liketh them, which shall not profit them! ' ' And that whole ensu- ing discourse sets a ban as well on the artificers as the worshippers: the close of which is, " Learn that their heart is ashes and earth, and that none can free his own soul." In which sentence David equally includes the makers too. "Such," says he, "let them become who make them." * And why should I, a man of limited memory, suggest anything further? Why recall anything more from the Scriptures? As if either the voice of the Holy Spirit were not sufficient; or else any further deliberation were needful, whether the Lord cursed and condemned by priority the artifi- cers of those things, of which He curses and condemns the worshippers!
CHAP. V.S — SUNDRY OBJECTIONS OR EXCUSES DEALT WITH.
We will certainly take more pains in an- swering the excuses of artificers of this kind, who ought never to be admitted into the house of God, if any have a knowledge of that Dis- cipline.* To begin with, that speech, wont ' " Sanguinis perditionis: " such is the reading of Oehler and others. If it be correct, probably the phrase " perdition of blood " must be taken as equivalent to " bloody perdition," after the He- brew fashion. Compare, for similar instances, 2 Sam. xvi. 7; Ps. V. 6, xxvi. 9, Iv. 23; Ezek. xxii. 2, with the marginal readings. But Fr. Junius would read, "Of blood and of perdition" — sanguinis et perditionis. Oehler's own interpretation of the reading he gives — " blood-shedding" — appears unsatisfactory.
2" In fanis." This is Oehler's reading on conjecture. Other readings are — infamis, infamibus, insanis, infernis.
3 Isa. xliv. 8 et seqq.
4Ps. cxv. 8. In our version, " They that make them are like unto them." TertulHan again agrees with the LXX.
5 Cf. chaps, viii. and xii.
6 i.e., the Discipline of the house of God, the Church. Oehler reads, "earn disciplinam," and takes the meaning to be that no