20 TertuUian calls by a proper name the vineyard which Isaiah (in his chap, v.) designates "the vineyard of the Lord of hosts," and interprets to be " the house of Israel" (ver. 7). The desig- nation comes from ver. 2, where the original clause '^"l^? TDyiS'l is translated in the Septuagint, Kat e^iireucra a/iTreAoi' itop^'ic. Ter- tuUian is most frequently in close agreement with the LXX.
== Ex praecepto.
-3 Ex arbitrio.
=5 P^odem gradu.
TERTULLIAN AGAINST MARCION.
[book IV.
CHAP. XXX. — PARABLES OF THE MUSTARD-SEED, AND OF THE LEAVEN. TRANSITION TO THE SOLEMN EXCLUSION WHICH WILL ENSUE WHEN THE MASTER OF THE HOUSE HAS SHUT THE DOOR. THIS JUDICIAL EXCLUSION WILL BE ADMINISTERED BY CHRIST, WHO IS SHOWN THEREBY TO POSSESS THE ATTRIBUTE OF THE CREATOR.
When the question was again raised con- cerning a cure performed on the Sabbath-day, how did He discuss it: " Doth not each of you on the Sabbath loose his ass or his ox from the stall, and lead him away to water- ing? "" When, therefore, He did a work ac- (cording to the condition prescribed by the law, He affirmed, Instead of breaking, the law, which commanded that no work should be done, except what might be done for any living being; ^ and if for any one, then how much more for a human life? In the case of the parables, it is allowed that I ' ever)rwhere require a congruity. "The kingdom of God," says He, "is Uke a grain of mustard- seed which a man took and cast into his gar- den." Who must be understood as meant by the mati 7 Surely Christ, because (although Marcion's) he was called " the Son of man." He received from the Father the seed of the kingdom, that is, the word of the gospel, and sowed it in his garden — in the world, of course * — in man at the present day, for in- stance.s Now, whereas it is said, " /« his garden,'' but neither the world nor man is his property, but the Creator's, therefore He who sowed seed in His own ground is shown to be the Creator. Else, if, to evade this snare,* they should choose to transfer the person of the tnati from Christ to any person who re- ceives the seed of the kingdom and sows it in the garden of his own heart, not even this meaning' would suit any other than the Crea- tor. For how happens it, if the kingdom be- long to the most lenient god, that it is closely followed up by a fervent judgment, the sever- ity of which brings weeping?* With regard, indeed, to the following similitude, I have my fears lest it should somehow ' presage the kingdom of the rival god! For He compared it, not to the unleavened bread which the Creator is more familiar with, but to leaven.^" Now this is a capital conjecture for men who are begging for arguments. I must, however.
' Luke xiii. 15. ' Omni animz. 3 Recognoscor.
♦ Utique. SPuta.
* Laqueuin. 7 Materia.
s I^crimosa austeniate, see Luke ziii. a8. 9 Forte, on my side, dispel one fond conceit by an- other," and contend with even leaven is suita ble for the kingdom of the Creator, because after it comes the oven, or, if you please," thf furnace of hell. How often has He already displayed Himself as a Judge, and in th' Judge the Creator? How often, indeed, has He repelled, and in the repulse con- demned? In the present passage, for in- stance, He says, "When once the master of the house is risen up; " '^ but in what sense except that in which Isaiah said, "When He ariseth to shake terribly the earth? " '* " And hath shut to the door," thereby shutting out the wicked, of course; and when these knock, He will answer, " I know you not whence ye are;" and when they recount how "they have eaten and drunk in His presence," He will further say to them, "Depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity; there shall be weep ing and gnashing of teeth." '5 But where Outside, no doubt, when they shall have beei. excluded with the door shut on them by Him. There will therefore be punishment inflicted by Him who excludes for punishment, when they shall behold the righteous entering the kingdom of God, but themselves detained without. By whom detained outside? If by the Creator, who shall be within receiving the righteous into the kingdom? The good God. What, therefore, is the Creator about,'* that He should detain outside for punishment those whom His adversary shut out, when He ought rather to have kindly received them, if they must come into His hands,'' for the greater irritation of His rival? But when about to exclude the wicked, he must, of course, either be aware that the Creator would detain them for punishment, or not be aware. Consequently either the wicked will be de- tained by the Creator against the will of the excluder, in which case he will be inferior to the Creator, submitting to Him unwillingly; or else, if the process is carried out with his will, then he himself has judicially determined its execution; and then he who is the very originator of the Creator's infamy, will not prove to be one whit better than the Creator. Now, if these ideas be incompatible with reason — of one being supposed to punish, and the other to liberate — then to one only power will appertain both the judgment and the kingdom and while they both belong to one. He who executeth judgment can be none else than the Christ of the Creator.
•" Vanitatein vanitate.
"Vel.
•3 Luke xiii. 25.
''Quid ergo illuc Creatori.
'7 Si:tique.
CHAP. XXXI.]
TERTULLIAN AGAINST MARCION.
CHAP. XXXI. — CHRIST S ADVICE TO INVITE THE POOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH ISAIAH. THE PARARLE OF THE GREAT SUPPER A PICTORIAL SKETCH OF THE CREATOR'S OWN DISPENSA- TIONS OF MERCY AND GRACE. THE REJEC- TIONS OF THE INVITATION PARALLELED BY QUOTATIONS FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT. MARCION'S CHRIST COULD NOT FULFIL THE CONDITIONS INDICATED IN THIS PARABLE. THE ABSURDITY OF THE MARCIONITE INTER- PRETATION.
What kind of persons does He bid should be invited to a dinner or a supper?' Pre- cisely such as he had pointed out by Isaiah: "Deal thy bread to the hungry man; and the beggars — even such as have no home — bring in to thine house," ^ because, no doubt, they are "unable to recompense" your act of humanity. Now, since Christ forbids the recompense to be expected now, but promises it "at the resurrection," this is the very plan ^ of the Creator, who dislikes those who love gifts and follow after reward. Consider also to which deity* is better suited the parable of him who issued invitations: "A certain man made a great supper, and bade many." s The preparation for the supper is no doubt a figure of the abundant provision * of eternal life. I first remark, that strangers, and persons un- connected by ties of relationship, are not usu- ally invited to a supper; but that members of the household and family are more frequently the favoured guests. To the Creator, then, it belonged to give the invitation, to whom also appertained those who were to be invited — whether considered as men, through their descent from Adam, or as Jews, by reason of their fathers; not to him who possessed no claim to them either by nature or prerogative. My next remark is,^ if He issues the invitations who has prepared the supper, then, in this sense the supper is the Creator's, who sent to warn the guests. These had been in- deed previously invited by the fathers, but were to be admonished by the prophets. It certaitily is not the feast of him who never sent a messenger to warn — who never did a thing before towards issuing an invitation, but came down himself on a sudden — only then^ be- ginning to be known, when already® giving his invitation; only then inviting, when already compelling to his banquet; appointing one and the same hour both for the supper and the invitation. But when invited, they excuse ^Isa. Iviii. 7.
3 Forma.
4Cui parti.
^Saturitatem.
7 Dehinc.
8Tantum quod...jam.
26 themselves.' And fairly enough, if the in- vitation came from the other god, because it was so sudden; if, however, the excuse was not a fair one, then the invitation was not a sudden one. Now, if the invitation was not a sudden one, it must have been given by the Creator — even by Him of old time, whose call they had at last refused. They first re- fused it when they said to Aaron, " Make us gods, which shall go before us; " '° and again, afterwards, when "they heard indeed with the ear, but did not understand "" their call- ing of God. In a manner most germane " to this parable. He said by Jeremiah: " Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people; and ye shall walk in all my ways, which I have commanded you." '-' This is the invitation of God. "But," says He, "they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear."''* This is the refusal of the people. "They departed, and walked every one in the imagination of their evil heart." '^ "I have bought a field — and I have bought some oxen — and I have married a wife."'^ And still He urges them: " I have sent unto you all my servants the prophets, rising early even before day-light." '^ The Holy Spirit is here meant, the admonisher of the guests. "Yet my people hearkened not unto me, nor intlined their ear, but hardened their neck.""* This was reported to the Master of the family. Then He was moved (He did well to be moved; for, as Marcion denies emotion to his god. He must be therefore my God), and commanded them to invite out of " the streets and lanes of the city." '» Let us see whether this is not the same in purport as His words by Jeremiah: " Have I been a wilderness to the house of Israel, or a land left unculti- vated? " - That is to say: " Then have I none whom I may call to me; have I no place whence I may bring them?" "Since my people have said. We will come no more unto thee." =" Therefore He sent out to call others, but from the same city." My third remark is this,^3 that although the place abounded with people. He yet commanded that they gather men from the highways and the hedges. In other words, we are now gathered out of the 'o Ex. xxxii. I. '2 Pertinentissime.
17 Jer. vii. 25; also xxv. 4, xxvi. 5, xxxv. 15, Xliv. 4. zojer. ii. 31.
^ Dehinc.
TERTULLIAN AGAINST MARCION.
[book IV, Gentile strangers; with that jealous resent- ment, no doubt, which He expressed in Deu- teronomy: " I will hide my face from them, and I will show them what shall happen in the last days ' (how that others shall possess their place); for they are a froward generation, children in whom is no faith. They have moved me to jealousy by that which is no god, and they have provoked me to anger with their idols; and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people: I will pro- voke them to anger with a foolish nation " ^ — even with us, whose hope the Jews still en- tertain. ^ But this hope the Lord says they should not realize;•» " Sion being left as a cottage 5 in a vinevard, as a lodge in a garden of cucumbers,"* since the nation re- jected the latest invitation to Christ. (Now, I ask,) after going through all this course of the Creator's dispensation and prophecies, what there is in it which can possibly be as- signed to him who has done all his work at one hasty stroke, ^ and possesses neither the Creator's" course nor His dispensation in harmony with the parable? Or, again in what will consist his first invitation, ^ and what his admonition '° at the second stage? Some at first would surely decline; others afterwards must have accepted." But now he comes to invite both parties promiscuously out of the city," out of the hedges, '^ contrary to the drift '< of the parable. It is impossible for him now to condemn as scorners of his invita- tion 's those whom he has never yet invited, and whom he is approaching with so much earnestness. If, however, he condemns them beforehand as about to reject his call, then beforehand he also predicts '* the election of the Gentiles in their stead. Certainly'' he means to come the second time for the very purpose of preaching to the heathen. But even if he does mean to come again, I im- agine it will not be with the intention of any longer inviting guests, but of giving to them their places. Meanwhile, you who interpret ' in' co-xaTui- ijfiepmv, Septuagint.
3 Gerunt: although vainly at present (" jam vana in Judaeis " — Oehler); Semler conjectures " ^emuni, bewail.'
4 Gu statures.
5 Specula, " a look-out; " o'kiji'^ is the word in LXX.
7 Semel.
^' This is probably the meaning of a very involved sentence: " Quid ex hoc ordine secundum dispensationem et pra;dicationes Creatoris recensendo comi)etit illi, cujus (" CV^-rt/or/j- ''—Oehler) nee ordinem habet nee dispositioneni ad parabola; conspirationem qui totum opus semel facit? " 9" By the fathers." See above.
'o" By the prophets." See also above. ^ ■' -An obscure sentence, which thus runs in the original: "Ante debent alii excusare, postea alii convenisse."
'' The Jews.
'3 The Gentiles.
'* Speculum.
'5 Ka.stidiosos.
'SPortendit.
>7 Plane: 1 his is a Marcionite position (Oehler).
the call to this supper as an invitation to a heavenly banquet of spiritual satiety and pleasure, must remember that the earthly promises also of wine and oil and corn, and even of the city, are equally employed by the Creator as figures of spiritual things.
CHAP. XXXII. — A SORT OF SORITES, AS THE LOGICIANS CALL IT, TO SHOW THAT THE PARABLES OF THE LOST SHEEP AND THE LOST DRACHMA HAVE NO SUITABLE APPLICA- TION TO THE CHRIST OF MARCION.
Who sought after the lost sheep and the lost piece of silver? '* Was it not the loser? But who was the loser? Was it not he who once possessed '' them? Who, then, was that? Was it not he to whom they belonged? '^ Since, then, man is the property of none other than the Creator, He possessed Him who owned him; He lost him who once possessed him; He sought him who lost him; He found him who sought him; He rejoiced who found him. Therefore the purport''' of neither para- ble has anything whatever to do with him =" to whom belongs neither the sheep nor the piece of silver, that is to say, man. For he lost him not, because he possessed him not; and he sought him not, because he lost him not; and he found him not, because he sought him not; and he rejoiced not, because he found him not. Therefore, to rejoice over the sin- ner's repentance — that is, at the recovery of lost man — is the attribute of Him who long ago professed that He would rather that the sinner should repent and not die.
CHAP. XXXIII. THE MARCIONITE INTERPRETA- TION OF GOD AND MAMMON REFUTED. THE PROPHETS JUSTIFY CHRIST'S ADMONITION AGAINST COVETOUSNESS AND PRIDE. JOHN BAPTIST THE LINK BETWEEN THE OLD AND THE NEW DISPENSATIONS OF THE CREATOR. SO SAID CHRIST BUT SO ALSO HAD ISAIAH SAID LONG BEFORE. ONE ONLY GOD, THE CREA- TOR, BY HIS OWN WILL CHANGED THE DISPEN- SATIONS. NO NEW GOD HAD A HAND IN THE CHANGE What the two masters are who, He says, cannot be served, ^^ on the ground that while one is pleased ■* the other must needs be dis- pleased,-^ He Himself makes clear, when He mentions God and mammon. Then, if you have no interpreter by you, you may learn •8 Luke XV. i-io.
>9 Habuit.
2oCujus fuit: i.e., each of the things respectively.
2' Arijumentum.
22 Vacat circa cum.
24l>efendi.
as Offendi.
CHAP. XXXIII,] TERTULLIAN AGAINST MARCION.
again from Himself what He would have un- derstood by maminon.^ For when advising us to provide for ourselves the help of friends in worldly affairs, after the example of that stew- ard who, when removed from his office,' re- lieves his lord's debtors by lessening their debts with a view to their recompensing him with their help, He said, "And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the inam- fnon of unrighteousness," that is to say, of money, even as the steward had done. Now we are all of us aware that money is the in- stigator^ of unrighteousness, and the lord of the whole world. Therefore, when he saw the covetousness of the Pharisees doing servile worship -^ to it. He hurled s this sentence against them, "Ye cannot serve God and mammon."* Then the Pharisees, who were covetous of riches, derided Him, when they understood that by mammon He meant money. Let no one think that under the word mammon the Creator was meant, and that Christ called them off from the service of the Creator. Yfha.t folly! Rather learn therefrom that one God was pointed out by Christ. For they were two masters whom He named, God and mammon — the Creator and money. You cannot indeed serve God — Him, of course, whom they seemed to serve — and mammon, to whom they preferred to devote themselves.^ If, however, he was giving himself out as another god, it would not be two masters, but three, that he had pointed out. For the Creator was a master, and much more of a master, to be sure,^ than mammon, and more to be adored, as being more truly our Mas- ter. Now, how was it likely that He who had called mammon a master, and had asso- ciated him with God, should say nothing of Him who was really the Master of even these, that is, the Creator? Or else, by this silence respecting Him did He concede that service might be rendered to Him, since it was to Himself alone and to mammon that He said service could not be (simultaneously) rendered? When, therefore. He lays down the position that God is one, since He would have been sure to mention 9 the Creator if He were Him- ' What in the Punic language is called Mammon, says Rigal- tius, the Latins call /«(rr«7«, " gain or lucre." See Augustine, Sertn. xxxv. de Verba dotnini. I would add Jerome, On the vi. 0/ Matthew where he says: " In the Syriac tongue, riches are called mam>non." And Augustine, in another passage, book ii., On the Lord s Sermon on the Mount, says: " Riches in Hebrew are said to be called mammon. This is evidently a Punic word, for in that language the synonyme Iot gain (iucrum) is mammon. Compare the same author on Ps. ciii. (Oehler).
^Abactu.
3 Auctorem.
* Famulatara.
5 Aramentavit.
7 Magis destinabantur: middle voice.
8 Utique.
9 Nominaturus.
self a rival '" to Him, He did (virtually) name the Creator, when He refrained from insist- ing "that He was Master alone, without a rival god. Accordingly, this will throw light upon the sense in which it was said, " If ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? " " " In the unrighteous mammon," that is to say, in unrighteous riches, not in the Creator; for even Marcion allows Him to be righteous: "And if ye have not been faith- ful in that which is another man's, who will give to you that which is mine? " '^ For what- ever is unrighteous ought to be foreign to the servants of God. But in what way was the Creator foreign to the Pharisees, seeing that He was the proper God of the Jewish nation? Forasmuch then as the words, " Who will en- trust to you the truer riches?" and, "Who will give you that which is mine? " are only suitable to the Creator and not to mammon, He could not have uttered them as alien to the Creator, and in the interest of the rival god. He could only seem to have spoken them in this sense, if, when remarking '* their unfaithfulness to the Creator and not to mam- mon. He had drawn some distinctions between the Creator (in his manner of mentioning Him) and the rival god — how that the latter would not commit his own truth to those who were unfaithful to the Creator. How then can he possibly seem to belong to another god, if He be not set forth, with the express intention of being separated '= from the very thing which is in question. But when the Pharisees "justified themselves before men,"'* and placed their hope of reward in man. He cen- sured them in the sense in which the prophet Jeremiah said, " Cursed is the man that trust- eth in man." '^ Since the prophet went on to say, " But the Lord knoweth your hearts," '^ he magnified the power of that God who de- clared Himself to be as a lamp, " searching the reins and the heart." '» When He strikes at pride in the words: " That which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God,"^ He recalls Isaiah: " For the day of the Lord of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is arrogant and lifted up, and they shall be brought low." " I can now make out 10 Alius.
«i Quem non posuit.
•^ Luke xvi. n.
13 Meum: Luke xvi. 12, where, however, the word is to vfie'repov, " that which is your own."
14 Notando.
■5 Ad hoc ut separetur.
'8 Jer. xvii. 10, in sense but not in letter.
TERTULLIAN AGAINST MARCION.
[book IV.
why Marcion's god was for so long an age concealed. He was, I suppose, waiting until he had learnt all these things from the Cre- ator. He continued his pupillage up to the time of John, and then proceeded forthwith to announce the kingdom of God, saying: " The law and the prophets were until John; since that time the kingdom of God is proclaimed." ' Just as if we also did not recognise in John a certain limit placed between the old dispensa- tion and the new, at which Judaism ceased and Christianity began — without, however, suppos- ing that it was by the power of another god that there came about a cessation * of the law and the prophets and the commencement of that gospel in which is the kingdom of God, Christ Himself. For although, as we have shown, the Creator foretold that the old state of things would pass away and a new state would succeed, yet, inasmuch as John is shown to be both the forerunner and the pre- parer of the ways of that Lord who was to introduce the gospel and publish the kingdom of God, it follows from the very fact that John has come, that Christ must be that very Being who was to follow His harbinger John, So that, if the old course has ceased and the new has begun, with John intervening between them, there will be nothing wonderful in it, because it happens according to the purpose of the Creator; so that you may get a better proof for the kingdom of God from any quar- ter, however anomalous, ^ than from the con- ceit that the law and the prophets ended in John, and a new state of things began after him. " More easily, therefore, may heaven and earth pass away — as also the law and the prophets — than that one tittle of the Lord's words should fail."" " For," as says Isaiah: " the word of our God shall stand for ever." s Since even then by Isaiah it was Christ, the Word and Spirit^ of the Creator, who pro- phetically described John as " the voice of one crying in the wilderness to prepare the way of the Lord," 7 and as about to come for the pur- pose of terminating thenceforth the course of the law and the prophets; by their fulfilment and not their extinction, and in order that the kingdom of God might be announced by Christ, He therefore purposely added the as- surance that the elements would more easily pass away than His words fail; affirming, as He did, the further fact, that what He had said concerning John had not fallen to the ground.
» I-uke XVI. i6.
2 Sedatio: literally, " a setting to rest," ijpt/tTjcrit. 3Ut undeunde magis probetur...rcgnum Dei.
'See above, note on chap, xxviii., towards the end, on this des- ignation of Christ's divine nature.
CHAP. XXXIV. — MOSES, ALLOWING DIVORCE, AND CHRIST PROHIBITING IT, EXPLAINED. JOHN BAPTIST AND HEROD. MARCION's AT- TEMPT TO DISCOVER AN ANTITHESIS IN THE PARABLE OF THE RICH MAN AND THE POOR MAN IN HADES CONFUTED. THE CREATOR'S APPOINTMENT MANIFESTED IN BOTH STATES.
But Christ prohibits divorce, saying, " Who- soever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery; and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her hus- band, also committeth adultery."® In order to forbid divorce. He makes it unlawful to marry a woman that has been put away. Moses, however, permitted repudiation in Deuteronomy: " When a man hath taken a wife, and hath lived with her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, be- cause he hath found unchastity in her; then let him write her a bill of divorcement and give it in her hand, and send her away out of his house." 5 You see, therefore, that there is a difference between the law and the gospel — between Moses and Christ? '° To be sure there is!" But then you have rejected that other gospel which witnesses to the same verity and the same Christ." There, while prohibiting divorce. He has given us a solu- tion of this special question respecting it: "Moses," says He, " because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to give a bill of divorcement; but from the beginning it was not so "'3 — for this reason, indeed, because He who had " made them male and female " had likewise said, " They twain shall become one flesh; what therefore God hath joined