The library · Edition and sources
Tertullian: Against Marcion, Books I–V
ANF historical edition · Edition commentary
Book V. Wherein Tertullian proves, with respect to St. Paul's epistles, what he had proved in the preceding book with respect to St. Luke's gospel. Far from being at variance, they were in perfect unison with the writings of the Old Testament, and therefore testified that the Creator was the only God, and that the Lord Jesus was his Christ. As in the preceding books, Tertullian supports his argument with profound reasoning, and many happy illustrations of Holy Scripture. — Translator and historical edition notes (part 12)
Comp. the Refutation of Epiphanius ( Hæres . xlii. Refut . 8): “Whether with reference to John or to the Saviour, He pronounces a blessing on such as should not be offended in Himself or in John. Nor should they devise for themselves whatsoever things they heard not from him. He also has a greater object in view, on account of which the Saviour said this; even that no one should think that John (who was pronounced to be greater than any born of women) was greater than the Saviour Himself, because even He was born of a woman. He guards against this mistake, and says, ‘Blessed is he who shall not be offended in me.’ He then adds, ‘He that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.’ Now, in respect of His birth in the flesh, the Saviour was less than he by the space of six months. But in the kingdom He was greater, being even his God. For the Only-begotten came not to say aught in secret, or to utter a falsehood in His preaching, as He says Himself, ‘In secret have I said nothing, but in public,’ etc. ( Κἄν τε πρὸς ᾽Ιωάννην ἔχοι…ἀλλὰ μετὰ παῤῥησίας ).”— Oehler .
Luke vii. 25 .
Tantundem competit creatori.
Major tanto propheta.
De remissa.
Luke vii. 36–50 .
Comp. Epiphanius, Hæres . xlii., Refut . 10, 11.
Hos. vi. 6 .
Hab. ii. 4 .
Isa. xxxii. 9, 10 . Quoted as usual, from the LXX.: Γυναῖκες πλούσιαι ἀνάστητε, καὶ ἀκούσατε τῆς φωνῆς μου· θυγατέρες ἐν ἐλπίδι εἰσακούσατε λόγους μου. ῾Ημέρας ἐνιαυτοῦ μνείαν ποιήσασθε ἐν ὀδύνῃ μετ᾽ ἐλπίδος.
Ostenderet.
Eloquii.
Pronunciatio.
Isa. vi. 9 .
Luke viii. 8 .
Luke viii. 18 .
Pronuntiationi.
Sane: with a touch of irony.
Luke viii. 18 .
Luke viii. 16 .
Luke viii. 17 .
Matt. xii. 48 .
Rationales. “Quæ voces adhibita ratione sunt interpretandæ.”— Oehler .
Luke x. 25 .
Luke xx. 20 .
Singular in the original, but (to avoid confusion) here made plural.
In allusion to Luke vii. 16 . See above, chap. xviii.
Advivit.
Adgenerantur.
Constat. [Jarvis, Introd . p. 204 and p. 536.]
Nunc: i.e., when Christ was told of His mother and brethren.
“C. Sentius Saturninus, a consular, held this census of the whole empire as principal augur, because Augustus determined to impart the sanction of religion to his institution. The agent through whom Saturninus carried out the census in Judæa was the governor Cyrenius, according to Luke, chap. ii.”— Fr. Junius . Tertullian mentions Sentius Saturninus again in De Pallio , i. Tertullian’s statement in the text has weighed with Sanclemente and others, who suppose that Saturninus was governor of Judæa at the time of our Lord’s birth, which they place in 747 a.u.c. “It is evident, however,” says Wieseler, “that this argument is far from decisive; for the New Testament itself supplies far better aids for determining this question than the discordant ecclesiastical traditions—different fathers giving different dates, which might be appealed to with equal justice; while Tertullian is even inconsistent with himself, since in his treatise Adv. Jud. viii., he gives 751 a.u.c. as the year of our Lord’s birth” (Wieseler’s Chronological Synopsis by Venables, p. 99, note 2). This Sentius Saturninus filled the office of governor of Syria, 744–748. For the elaborate argument of Aug. W. Zumpt, by which he defends St. Luke’s chronology, and goes far to prove that Publius Sulpicius Quirinus (or “Cyrenius”) was actually the governor of Syria at the time of the Lord’s birth, the reader may be referred to a careful abridgment by the translator of Wieseler’s work, pp. 129–135.
Non simpliciter. St. Mark rather than St. Luke is quoted in this interrogative sentence.
Ex condicione rationali. See Oehler’s note, just above, on the word “ rationales .”
Abdicavit: Rigalt thinks this is harsh , and reminds us that at the cross the Lord had not cast away his Mother. [Elucidation VI.]
This is literally from St. Matthew’s narrative, chap. xii. 48 .
In semetipso.
Matt. x. 37 .
Ceterum.
i.e., the kindred. [N.B. He includes the Mother!]
We have translated Oehler’s text of this passage: “Denique nihil magnum, si fidem sanguini, quam non habebat.” For once we venture to differ from that admirable editor (and that although he is supported in his view by Fr. Junius), and prefer the reading of the mss. and the other editions: “Denique nihil magnum, si fidem sanguini, quem non habebat.” To which we would give an ironical turn, usual to Tertullian, “After all, it is not to be wondered at if He preferred faith to flesh and blood, which he did not himself possess!”—in allusion to Marcion’s Docetic opinion of Christ.
Luke viii. 25 .
Agnorant.
Et pari utrinque stupore discriminis fixum.
Josh. iii. 9–17 .
This obscure passage is thus read by Oehler, from whom we have translated: “Lege extorri familiæ dirimendæ in transitu ejus Jordanis machæram fuisse, cujus impetum atque decursum plane et Jesus docuerat prophetis transmeantibus stare.” The machæram (“sword”) is a metaphor for the river . Rigaltius refers to Virgil’s figure, Æneid , viii. 62, 64, for a justification of the simile. Oehler has altered the reading from the “ ex sorte familæ,” etc., of the mss. to “ extorri familiæ,” etc. The former reading would mean probably: “Read out of the story of the nation how that Jordan was as a sword to hinder their passage across its stream.” The sorte (or, as yet another variation has it, “ et sortes ,” “the accounts”) meant the national record, as we have it in the beginning of the book of Joshua. But the passage is almost hopelessly obscure.
Solis.
Istius.
Ps. xxix. 3 .
Hab. iii. 10 , according to the Septuagint.
Nah. i. 4 .
See above, book iii. chap. xiii.
Luke viii. 30 .
Atque ita ipsum esse.
Ps. xxiv. 8 .
Luke viii. 28 .
Agentem.
Conversaretur.
Substantiæ: including these demons.
Sed enim: the ἀλλὰ γὰρ of the Greek.
Aliquid.
Pusillitatibus.
Ego.
Luke viii. 43–46 .
See above, book iii. chap. xxv.
Adæquatum: on a par with.
Lev. xv. 19 .
A Marcionite hypothesis.
Luke viii. 48 .
Ecquomodo legem ejus irrupit.
Primo.
Spurcitia.
Non temere.
In lege taxari.
Illa autem redundavit.
Distinxisse.
Isa. vii. 9 .
Luke viii. 48 .
Utique.
Epiphanius, in Hæres . xlii. Refut . 14, has the same remark.
Qua res vacua.
In allusion to the Marcionite hypothesis mentioned above.
Luke ix. 1–6 .
Vestit.
Libertatem oris.
Deut. xxv. 4 .
In testationem redigi.
Probatum.
Luke ix. 7, 8 .
Luke ix. 10–17 .
Scilicet.
De pristino more.
Aut.
Protelavit.
Exuberare.
Redundaverant.
1 Kings xvii. 7–16 .
Ordinem.
I have no doubt that ten was the word written by our author; for some Greek copies read δέκα , and Ambrose in his Hexaëmeron , book vi. chap. ii., mentions the same number (Fr. Junius).
2 Kings iv. 42–44 .
Luke ix. 20 .
Recensebat.
Luke ix. 21 .
Utique.
Immo.
Luke ix. 22 .
See below, chaps. xl.–xliii.
Sic quoque.
Luke ix. 24 .
Certe.
Compare above, chap. x., towards the end.
Jam tunc.
Dan. iii. 25, 26 .
Ista.
Decucurrerunt.
Isa. lvii. i .
We have, by understanding res , treated these adjectives as nouns. Rigalt. applies them to the doctrina of the sentence just previous. Perhaps, however, “ persecutione ” is the noun.
Luke ix. 26 .
Materia conveniat.
Ordo.
Perorantibus.
Fœditatem.
Ipsius etiam carnis indignitatem; because His flesh, being capable of suffering and subject to death, seemed to them unworthy of God. So Adv. Judæos , chap. xiv., he says: “Primo sordidis indutus est, id est carnis passibilis et mortalis indignitate.” Or His “indignity” may have been εἶδος οὐκ ἄξιον τυραννίδος , His “ unkingly aspect ” (as Origen expresses it, Contra Celsum , 6); His “form of a servant,” or slave, as St. Paul says. See also Tertullian’s De Patientia , iii. (Rigalt.)
Coagulatur. [ Job x. 10 .]
Ex feminæ humore.
Pecus. Julius Firmicus, iii. 1, uses the word in the same way: “ Pecus intra viscera matris artuatim concisum a medicis proferetur.” [Jul. Firmicus Maternus, floruit circa , a.d. 340.]
Such is probably the meaning of “non decem mensium cruciatu deliberatus.” For such is the situation of the infant in the womb, that it seems to writhe ( cruciari ) all curved and contracted (Rigalt.). Latinius read delibratus instead of deliberatus , which means, “suspended or poised in the womb as in a scale.” This has my approbation. I would compare De Carne Christi , chap. iv. (Fr. Junius). Oehler reads deliberatus in the sense of liberatus .
Statim lucem lacrimis auspicatus.
Primo retinaculi sui vulnere: the cutting of the umbilical nerve. [Contrast Jer. Taylor, on the Nativity , Opp. I. p. 34.]
Nec sale ac melle medicatus. Of this application in the case of a recent childbirth we know nothing; it seems to have been meant for the skin. See Pliny, in his Hist. Nat . xxii. 25.