earth. 7 "He sitteth at the Father's right hand"* — not the Father at His own. He is seen by Stephen, at his martyrdom by stoning, still sitting at the right hand of God,^ where He will continue to sit, until the Father shall make His enemies His footstool.'" He will come again on the clouds of heaven, just as He appeared when He ascended into heaven." Meanwhile He has received from the Father the promised gift, and has shed it forth, even the Holy Spirit — the Third Name in the God- head, and the Third Degree of the Divine Majesty; the Declarer of the One Monarchy of God, but at the same time the Interpreter of the Economy, to every one who hears and receives the words of the new prophecy; '- and "the Leader into all truth," '^ such as Is - This is the'sense rather than the words of Isa. liii. 5, 6.
3 Luke xxiii. 46.
•4 i.e., the divine nature.
in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, according to the mystery of the doc- trine of Christ.
CHAP. XXXI. — RETROGRADE CHARACTER OF THE HERESY OF PRAXEAS. THE DOCTRINE OF THE BLESSED TRINITY CONSTITUTES THE GREAT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JUDAISM AND CHRIS- TIANITY.
But, (this doctrine of yours bears a likeness) to the Jewish faith, of which this is the sub- stance— so to believe in One God as to refuse to reckon the Son besides Him, and after the Son the Spirit. Now, what difference would there be between us and them, if there were not this distinction which you are for break- ing down 2 What need would there be of the gospel, which is the substance of the New Covenant, laying down (as it does) that. the Law and the Prophets lasted until John the Baptist, if thenceforward the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are not both believed in as Tiiree, and as making One Only God? God was pleased to renew His covenant with man in such a way as that His Unity might be be lieved in, after a new manner, through the Son and the Spirit, in order that God might now be known openly,'* in His proper Names and Persons, who in ancient times was not plainly understood, though declared through the Son and the Spirit. Away, then, with '5 those "Antichrists who deny the Father and the Son." For they deny the Father, when they say that He is the same as the Son; and they deny the Son, when they suppose Him to be the same as the Father, by assigning to Them things which are not Theirs, and taking away from Them things which are Theirs. But "whosoever shall confess that (Jesus) Christ is the Son of God " (not the Father), " God dwelleth in him, and he in God. " '^ We believe not the testimony of God in which He testifies to us of His Son. " He that hath not the Son, hath not life. " '^ And that man has not the Son, who believes Him to be any other than the Son.
I' Acts i. II; Luke xxi. 37.
12 TertuUian was now a [pronounced] Montanist.
■4 Coram.
15 Viderint.
POSTSCRIPT.
The learned Dr. Holmes, the translator of the Second volume of the Edinburgh series, to which our arrangement has given another position, furnished it with a Preface as follows: " This volume contains all Tertullian's /(7/^w/V<// works (placed in his second volume by 628 ELUCIDATIONS.
Oehler, whose text we have followed), with the exception of the long treatise Against Alarcion, which has already formed a volume of this series, and the Adversus Judfeos, which, not to increase the bulk of the present volume, appears among the Miscellaneous Tracts.
" For the scanty facts connected with our author's life, and for some general remarks on the importance and style of his writings, the reader is referred to the Introduction of my translation of the Five Books against Marcio?i.
" The treatises which comprise this volume will be found replete with the vigorous thought and terse expression which always characterize TertuUian.
" Brief synopses are prefixed to the several treatises, and headings are supplied to the chapters: these, with occasional notes on difficult passages and obscure allusions, will, it is hoped, afford sufficient aid for an intelligent perusal of these ancient writings, which cannot fail to be interesting alike to the theologian and the general reader, — full as they are of rev- erence for revealed truth, and at the same time of independence of judgment, adorned with admirable variety and fulness of knowledge, genial humour, and cultivated imagination."
Dr. Holmes further adorned this same volume with a dedication to a valued friend, in the following words: ''^The Right Rev. Father in God, W. I. Trower, D.D., late Lord Bishop of Gibraltar, and fortnerly Bishop of Glasgo^v and Galway: Mv DEAR Lord, In one of our conversations last summer, you were kind enough to express an interest in this publication, and to favour me with some valuable hints on my own share in it. It gives me therefore great pleasure to inscribe your honoured name on the first page of this volume.
I avail myself of this public opportunity of endorsing, on my own account, the high opinion which has long been entertained of your excellent volumes on The Epistles and The Gospels.
Recalling to mind, as I often do, our pleasant days at Pennycross and Mannamead, I re- main, my dear Lord, very faithfully yours, Peter Holmes."
Mannamead, March lo, 1870.
ELUCIDATIONS.
I- (Sundry doctrinal statements of TertuUian. See p. 601 {et seqq.), supra.)
I am glad for many reasons that Dr. Holmes appends the following from Bishop Kaye's Account of the Writings of TertuUian: " On the doctrine of the blessed Trinity, in order to explain his meaning TertuUian borrows illustrations from natural objects. The three Persons of the Trinity stand to each other in the relation of the root, the shrub, and the fruit; of the fountain, the river, and the cut from the river; of the sun, the ray, and the terminating point of the ray. For these'illustrations he professes himself indebted to the Revelations of the Paraclete. In later times, divines have occasionally resorted to similar illustrations for the purpose of familiarizing the doctrine of the Trinity to the mind; nor can any danger arise from the proceeding, so long as we ELUCIDATIONS. 629 ELUCIDATIONS. 629 recollect that they are illustrations, not arguments — that we must not draw conclusions from them, or think that whatever may be truly predicated of the illustrations, may be predicated with equal truth of that which it was designed to illustrate."
'' ' Notwithstanding, however, the intimate union which subsists between the Father, Son, and Holy Gliost, we must be careful,' says Tertullian, ' to distinguish between theii Persons.' In his representations of this distinction he sometimes uses expressions which in after times, when controversy had introduced greater precision of language, were studiously avoided by the orthodox. Thus he calls the Father the whole substance — the Son a deriva> tion from or portion of the whole."'
"After showing that Tertullian's opinions were generally coincident with the orthodox belief of the Christian Church on the great subject of the Trinity in Unity, Bp. Kaye goes on to say: 'We are far from meaning to assert that expressions may not occasionally be found which are capable of a different interpretation, and which were carefully avoided by the orthodox writers of later times, when the controversies respecting the Trinity had introduced ^i^reater precision of language. Pamelius thought it necessary to put the reader on his guard against certain of these expressions; and Semler has noticed, with a sort of ill-natured industry (we call it ill-natured industry^ because the true mode of ascertaining a writer's opinions is, not to fix upon particular expressions, but to take the general tenor of his lan- guage), every passage in the Tract against Praxeas in which there is any appearance of con- tradiction, or which will bear a construction favourable to the Arian tenets. Bp. Bull also, who conceives the language of Tertullian to be explicit and correct on the subject of the pre-existence and the consubstantiality, admits that he occasionally uses expressions at vari- ance with the co-eternity of Christ. For instance, in the Tract against Hermogenes,^ we find a passage in which it is expressly asserted that there was a time when the Son was not. Perhaps, however, a reference to the peculiar tenets of Hermogenes will enable us to account for this assertion. That heretic affirmed that matter was eternal, and argued thus: 'God was always God, and always Lord; but the word Lord implies the existence of something over which He was Lord. Unless, therefore, we suppose the eternity of something distinct from God, it is not true that He was always Lord.* Tertullian boldly answered, that God was not always Lord; and that in Scripture we do not find Him called Lord until the work of creation was completed. In like manner, he contended that the titles of Judge and Father imply the existence of sin, and of a Son. As, therefore, there was a time when neither sin nor the Son existed, the titles of Judge and Father were not at that time applicable to God. Tertullian could scarcely mean to affirm (in direct opposition to his own statements in the Tract against Praxeas) that there was ever a time when the loyoq, or RatiOy or Sernw Internus did not exist. But with respect to JVisdo/n and the Son [Sophia and Filius) the case is dif- ferent. Tertullian assigns to both a beginning of existence: Sophia was created or formed ill order to devise the plan of the universe; and the Son was begotten in order to carry that plan into effect. Pip. Bull appears to have given an accurate representation of the matter, ■when he says that, according to our author, the Reason and Spirit of God, being the sub- stance of the Word and Son, were co-eternal with God; but that the titles of Word and Son were not strictly applicable until the former had been emitted to arrange, and the latter begotten to execute, the work of creation. Without, therefore, attempting to explain, much less to defend, all Tertullian's expressions and reasonings, we are disposed to acquiesce in the statement given by Bp. Bull of his opinions [Defence of the Nicene Creed, sec. iii. ch. x. (p. 545 of the Oxford translation)): ' From all this it is clear how rashly, as usual, Petavius has pronounced that, ''''so far as relates to the eternity 'Ch. iii. comnaretl with ch. xviii.
6:iO ELUCIDATIONS.
of the Word, it is manifest that Tertullian did not by any means acknmvledge it." ' To myself, indeed, and as I suppose to my reader also, after the many clear testimonies which I have adduced, the very opposite is manifest, unless indeed Petavius played on the term, the Word, which I will not suppose. For Tertullian does indeed teach that the Son of God was made and was called the Word ( Vcrbum or Sermo) from some definite beginning, i.e. at the time when He went out from God the Father with the voice, 'Let there be light' in order to arrange the universe. But, for all that, that he really believed that the very hypostasis which is called the Word and Son of God is eternal, I have, I think, abun- dantly demonstrated." (The whole of Bp. Bull's remark is worth considering; it occurs in the translation just referred to, pp. 508-545.) — (Pp. 521-525.)
"In speaking also of the Holy Ghost, Tertullian occasionally uses terms of a very ambiguous and equivocal character. He says, for instance {Adversus Fraxean, c. xii.), that in Gen. i. 26, God addressed the Son, His Word (the Second Person in the Trinity), and the Spirit in the JVord {the Third Person of the Trinit}'). Here the distinct personality of the Spirit is expressly asserted; although it is difficult to reconcile TertuUian's words, * Spiritus in Sermone,' with the assertion. It is, however, certain both from the general tenor of the Tract against Praxeas, and from many passages in his other writings (for instance, Ad Marfyres, iii.), that the distinct personality of the Holy Ghost formed an article of TertuUian's creed. The occasional ambiguity of his language respecting the Holy Ghost is perhaps in part to be traced to the variety of senses in which the term ''Spiritus' is used. It is applied generally to God, for ' God is a Spirit ' {Adv. Marcionem, ii. 9); and for the same reason to the Son, who is frequently called ' the Spirit of God,' and ' the Spirit of the Creator' {Dc Oratione, i.; Adv. Praxeati, xiv., xxvi.; Adv. Marcionem, \. 8; Apolog. xxiii.; Adv. Marcionem, iii. 6, iv. 33). Bp. Bull likewise {Defence of the Nicene Creed, i.
2), following Grotius, has shown that the word ' Spiritus ' is emplo)'^ed by the fathers to express the divine nature in Christ." — (Pp. 525, 526.)
II.
(The bishop of Rome, cap. i. p. 597.)
Probably Victor (a.d. 190), who is elsewhere called Victor/>/«i', as Oehler conjectures, by a blunderer who tacked the inus to his name, because he was thinking of Zephyu'nus, his immediate successor. This Victor "acknowledged the prophetic gifts of Montanus," and kept up communion with the Phrygian churches that adopted them: but worse than that, he now seems to have patronized the Patri-passion heresy, under the compulsion of Praxeas. So Tertullian says, who certainly had no idea that the Bishop of Rome was the infallible judge of controversies, when he recorded the facts of this strange history. Thus, we find the very founder of " Latin Christianity," accusing a contemporary Bishop of Rome of heresy and the patronage of heresy, in two particulars. Our earliest acquaintance with that See presents us with Polycarp's superior authority, at Rome itself, in maintaining apostolic doctrine and suppressing heresy. " He it was, who coming to Rome," says Irenaeus,' "in the time of Anicetus, caused many to turn away from the aforesaid heretics (viz. Val.. entinus and Marcion) to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received this one and sole truth from the Afiost/es." Anicetus was a pious prelate who never dreamed of asserting a superior claim as the chief depositary of Apostolic orthodoxy, and whose beautiful example in the Easter-questions discussed between Polycarp and himself, is another illustration of the independence of the sister churches, at that period.- Nor is it unworthy to be noted, that the next event, in Western history, establishes a like principle against that other and KIAJCIDATIONS. 631 Itss worthy occupant of the Roman See, of whom we have spoken. Irenaeus rebukes ^'ictor for his dogmatism about Easter, and reproaches him with departing from the example of his predecessors in the same See.' With Eleutherus he had previously remonstrated, though mildly, for his toleration of heresy and his patronage of the raising schism of Mon- tanus.- III. (These three are one, cap. xxv. p. 621. Also p. 606.)
Person having spoken Pontifically upon the matter of the text of" the Three Witnesses," cadit qucesfio, locutiis est Augur Apollo. It is of more importance that Bishop Kaye in his calm wisdom, remarks as follows:^ " In my opinion, the passage in Tertullian, far from containing an allusion to I. John v. 7, furnishes most decisive proof that he knew nothing of the verse." After this, and the acquiescence of scholars generally, it would be presumption to say a word on the question of quoting it as Scripture. In Textual Criticism it seems to be an established canon that it has no place in the Greek Testament. I submit, however, that, something remains to be said for it, on the ground of the old African Version used and quoted by Tertullian and Cyprian; and I dare to say, that, while there would be no ground what- ever for inserting it in our English Version, the question of striking it out is a widely dif- ferent one. It would be sacrilege, in my humble opinion, for reasons which will appear, in the following remarks, upon our author.
It appears to me very clear that Tertullian is quoting I. John v. 7. in the passage now under consideration: " Qui tres unum sunt, non unus, quomodo dictum est, Ego et Pater unum sumus, etc.'' Let me refer to a work containing a sufificient answer to Porson, on this point of Tertullian's quotation, which it is easier to pass sub-silefitio, than to refute. I mean Forster's Neia Plea, of which the full title is placed in the margin.'* The whole work is worth thoughtful study, but, I name it with reference to this important passage of our author, exclusively. In connection with other considerations on which I have no right to enlarge in this place, it satisfies me as to the primitive origin of the text in the Vulgate, and hence of its right to stand in our English Vulgate until it can be shewn that the Septuagint Version, quoted and honoured by our Lord, is free from similar readings, and divergences from the Hebrew MSS.
Stated as a mere question as to the early African Church, ^ the various versions known as the Itala, and the right of the Latin and English Vulgates to remain as they are, the whole question is a fresh one. Let me be pardoned for saying: (i) that I am not pleading for it as a proof-text of the Trinity, having never once quoted it as such in a long ministry, during which I have preached nearly a hundred Trinity-Sunday Sermons; (2) that I con- sider it as practically Apocryphal, and hence as coming under St. Jerome's law, and being- useless to establish doctrine; and (3) that I feel no need of it, owing to the wealth of Scrip- ture on the same subject. Tertullian, himself says that he cites "only a few out of manv texts — not pretending to bring up all the passages of Scripture...having produced an accumulation of witnesses in the fulness of their dignity and authority."
To those interested in the question let me commend the learned dissertation of Grabe on the textual case, as it stood in his day.* I value it chiefly because it proves that the Greek Testament, elsewhere says, disjoi?itedly, what is collected into I. John v. 7. It is, there- fore, Holy Scripture in substance, if not in the letter. What seems to me important, how- » Eusebius, B. V. cap. 24. Refer also to preceding note, and to Vol. I. p. 310, this Series.
' Vol. IT. pp. 3 and 4, this Series, also, Eusebius, B. V. Cap. iii. 3 p. jifi.
4 " A New Plea for the Authenticity of the text of the Three Heavenly Witnesses: or, Person's Letters to Travis eclectically op amiDcd, etc. etc. By the Rev. Charles Forster, etc." Cambridge, Deighton, Bell & Co., and London, Bell & Daldy, 1867.
632 ELUCIDxVTIONS.
ever, is the balance it gives to the whole context, and the defective character of the grammar and logic, if it be stricken out. In the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate of the Old Testament we have a precisely similar case. Refer to Psalm xiii., alike in the Latin and the Greek, as compared with our English Version. ' Between the third and fourth verses, three whole verses are interpolated: Shall we strike them out? Of course, if certain critics are to prevail over St. Paul, for he quotes them (Rom. iii. 10) with the formula: "" As it is written." Now, then, till we expurgate the English Version of the Epistle to the Romans, — or rather the original of St. Paul himself, I employ Grabe's argument only to prove my point, which is this, viz., that I. John v. 7 being Scripture, ought to be left untouched in the Versions where it stands, although it be no part of the Greek Testament.
> Where it is Psalm XIV.
VIII.
SCORPIACE.
ANTIDOTE FOR THE SCORPION'S STING.
[TRANSLATED BY REV. S. THELWALL.]
CHAP. I.
The earth brings forth,.is if by suppura- tion, great evil from the diminutive scorpion. The poisons are as many as are the kinds of it, the disasters as many as are also the species of it, the pains as many as are also the colours of it. Nicander writes on /he subject of scor- pions, and depicts them. And yet to smite with the tail — which tail will be whatever is prolonged from the hindmost part of the body, and scourges — is the one movement which they all use when making an assault. Where- fore that succession of knots in the scorpion, which in the inside is a thin poisoned veinlet, rising up with a bow-like bound, draws tight a barbed sting at the end, after the manner of an engine for shooting missiles. From which circumstance they also call after the scor- pion, the warlike implement which, by its being drawn back, gives an impetus to the arrows. The point in their case is also a duct of extreme minuteness, to inflict the wound; and where it penetrates, it pours out poison^ The usual time of danger is the summer sea- son: fierceness hoists the sail vv^hen the wind is from the south and the south-west. Among cures, certain substances supplied by nature have very great efficacy; magic also puts on some bandage; the art of healing counteracts with lancet and cup. For some, making haste, take also beforehand a protecting draught; but sexual intercourse drains it off, and they are dry again. We have faith for a defence, if we are not smitten with distrust itself also, in immediately making the sign - and adjuring,^ and besmearing the heel with ^Of the cross over the wounded part. [This translation is fre- quently weakened by useless interpolations; some of these destroy- ing the author's style, for nothing, I have put into footnotes or dropped.]
the beast. Finally, we often aid in this way even the heathen, seeing we have been endowed by God with that power which the apostle first used when he despised the viper's bite.* What, then, does this pen of yours offer, if faith is safe by what it has of its own? That it may be safe by what it has of its own also at other times, when it is subjected to scor- pions of its own. These, too, have a trouble- some littleness, and are of different sorts, and are armed in one manner, and are stirred up at a definite time, and that not another than one of burning heat. This among Christians is a season of persecution. When, therefore, faith is greatly agitated, and the Church burn- ing, as represented by the bush,^ then tlie Gnostics break out, then the Valentinians creep forth, then all the opponents of martyr- dom bubble up, being themselves also hot to strike, penetrate, kill. For, because they know that many are artless and also inexperi- enced, and weak moreover, that a very great number in truth are Christians who veer about* with the wind and conform to its moods, they perceive that they are never to be approached more than when fear has opened the entrances to the soul, especially when some display of ferocity has already arrayed with a crown the faith of martyrs. Therefore, drawing along the tail hitherto, they first of all apply it to the feelings, or whip with it as if on empty space. Innocent persons undergo such suffer- ing. So that you may suppose the speaker to be a brother or a heathen of the better sort ? l.f. adjuring the part, in the name of Jesus, and besmearing the poisoned heel with the gore of the beast, when it has been crushed to death. [So the translator; but the terse rhetoric of the original is not so circumstantial, and refers, undoubtedly, to the lingering influence of miracles, according to 3t. Mark, xvi.
4 Acts xxvm. 3.
SCORPIACE.
[chap. II.
A sect troublesome to nobody so dealt with! Then they pierce. Men are perishing with- out a reason. For that they are perishing, and without a reason, is the first insertion. Then they now strike mortally. But the un- sophisticated souls' know not what is written, and what meaning it bears, where and when and before whom we must confess, or ought, save that this, to die for God, is, since He preserves me, not even artlessness, but folly, nay madness. If He kills me, how will it be His duty to preserve me? Once for all Christ died for us, once for all He was slain that we might not be slain. If He demands the like from me in return, does He also look for sal- vation from my death by violence? Or does God importune for the blood of men, especi- ally if He refuses that of bulls and he-goats? ^ Assuredly He had rather have the repentance than the death of the sinner. ^ And how is He eager for the death of those who are not sinners? Whom will not these, and perhaps other subtle devices containing heretical poi- sons, pierce either for doubt if not for de- struction, or for irritation if not for death? As for you, therefore, do you, if faith is on the alert, smite on the spot the scorpion with a curse, so far as you can, with your sandal,