Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Answer to the Foregoing Arguments.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter
XXII.—Answer to the Foregoing Arguments.
They who make this concession8874
ought to reflect on the nature of the word
itself—what is the meaning of “woman” from the very
first records of the sacred writings. Here they find it to be the
name of the sex, not a class of the sex: if, that is, God
gave to Eve, when she had not yet known a man, the surname
“woman” and “female”8875
| 8875 Gen. ii. 23. In the LXX. and in the Eng. ver. there
is but the one word “woman.” | —(“female,” whereby the sex
generally; “woman,” hereby a class of the sex, is
marked).8876
| 8876 These words are
regarded by Dr. Routh as spurious, and not without reason. Mr. Dodgson
likewise omits them, and refers to de Virg. Vel. cc. 4 and
5. | So, since at that
time the as yet unwedded Eve was called by the word
“woman,” that word has been made common even to a
virgin.8877
| 8877 In de Virg.
Vel. 5, Tertullian speaks even more strongly: “And so
you have the name, I say not now common, but proper to a
virgin; a name which from the beginning a virgin
received.” | Nor is it wonderful
that the apostle—guided, of course, by the same Spirit by whom,
as all the divine Scripture, so that book Genesis, was drawn
up—has used the selfsame word in writing “women,”
which, by the example of Eve unwedded, is applicable too to a
“virgin.” In fact, all the other passages are in consonance
herewith. For even by this very fact, that he has not named
“virgins” (as he does in another place8878
where he is teaching touching marrying), he
sufficiently predicates that his remark is made touching every
woman, and touching the whole sex; and that there is no
distinction made between a “virgin” and any other,
while he does not name her at all. For he who elsewhere—namely,
where the difference requires—remembers to make the distinction,
(moreover, he makes it by designating each species by their appropriate
names,) wishes, where he makes no distinction (while he does not
name each), no difference to be understood. What of the fact
that in the Greek speech, in which the apostle wrote his letters, it is
usual to say, “women” rather than “females;”
that is, γυναῖκας
(gunaikas) rather than
θηλείας
(theleias)? Therefore if that word,8879
which by interpretation represents what
“female” (femina) represents,8880
| 8880 Mr. Dodgson
appears to think that there is some transposition here; and at first
sight it may appear so. But when we look more closely, perhaps there is
no need to make any difficulty: the stress is rather on the words
“by interpretation,” which, of course, is a
different thing from “usage;” and by
interpretation γυνή appears to come
nearer to “femina” than to
“mulier.” | is frequently used instead of the
name of the sex,8881
he has named the
sex in saying γυναῖκα; but in
the sex even the virgin is embraced. But, withal, the
declaration is plain: “Every woman,” saith he,
“praying and prophesying with head uncovered,8882
dishonoureth her own head.”8883
What is “every woman,”
but woman of every age, of every rank, of every condition? By
saying “every” he excepts nought of womanhood, just as he
excepts nought of manhood either from not being covered; for
just so he says, “Every man.”8884
As, then, in the masculine sex, under the
name of “man” even the “youth” is
forbidden to be veiled; so, too, in the feminine, under the name
of “woman,” even the “virgin” is bidden
to be veiled. Equally in each sex let the younger age follow the
discipline of the elder; or else let the male
“virgins,”8885
too, be
veiled, if the female virgins withal are not veiled,
because they are not mentioned by name. Let
“man” and “youth” be different, if
“woman” and “virgin” are different. For indeed
it is “on account of the angels”8886
that he saith women must be veiled, because on account of “the
daughters of men” angels revolted from God.8887
| 8887 See Gen. vi. 2 in the LXX., with the v. l.
ed. Tisch. 1860; and compare Tertullian, de Idol. c. 9,
and the note there. Mr. Dodgson refers, too, to de Virg. Vel. c.
7, where this curious subject is more fully entered into. | Who then, would contend that
“women” alone—that is,8888
| 8888 i.e. according
to their definition, whom Tertullian is refuting. | such as were already wedded and had lost
their virginity—were the objects of angelic concupiscence, unless
“virgins” are incapable of excelling in beauty and finding
lovers? Nay, let us see whether it were not virgins alone whom
they lusted after; since Scriptures saith “the daughters
of men;”8889
inasmuch as it
might have named “wives of men,” or
“females,” indifferently.8890
| 8890 i.e. If
married women had been meant, either word,
“uxores” or “feminæ,” could have
been used indifferently. |
Likewise, in that it saith, “And they took them to themselves for
wives,”8891
it does so on this
ground, that, of course, such are “received for
wives” as are devoid of that title. But it would have
expressed itself differently concerning such as were not thus
devoid. And so (they who are named) are devoid as much of
widowhood as of virginity. So completely has Paul
by naming the sex generally, mingled “daughters” and
species together in the genus. Again, while he says that “nature
herself,”8892
which has assigned
hair as a tegument and ornament to women, “teaches that veiling
is the duty of females,” has not the same tegument and the same
honour of the head been assigned also to virgins? If “it is
shameful” for a woman to be shorn it is similarly so to a virgin
too. From them, then, to whom is assigned one and the same law
of the head,8893
one and the same
discipline8894
of the head is
exacted,—(which extends) even unto those virgins whom their
childhood defends,8895
for from the
first8896
a virgin was named
“female.” This custom,8897
| 8897 Of the
“universal veiling of women.” | in short, even
Israel observes; but if Israel did not observe it,
our Law,8898
| 8898 i.e. as above, the
Sermon on the Mount. | amplified and
supplemented, would vindicate the addition for itself; let it be
excused for imposing the veil on virgins also. Under our
dispensation, let that age which is ignorant of its sex8899
retain the privilege of simplicity. For both
Eve and Adam, when it befell them to be “wise,”8900
forthwith veiled what they had learnt to
know.8901
| 8901 Gen.
ii. 27 (or in the LXX. iii. 1), and iii. 7, 10, 11. | At all events, with regard to those in whom
girlhood has changed (into maturity), their age ought to remember its
duties as to nature, so also, to discipline; for they are being
transferred to the rank of “women” both in their persons
and in their functions. No one is a “virgin” from the time
when she is capable of marriage; seeing that, in her, age has by that
time been wedded to its own husband, that is, to time.8902
| 8902 Routh refers us to
de Virg. Vel. c. 11. | “But some particular virgin has
devoted herself to God. From that very moment she both changes
the fashion of her hair, and converts all her garb into that of a
‘woman.’” Let her, then, maintain the character
wholly, and perform the whole function of a “virgin:” what
she conceals8903
| 8903 i.e. the redundance of
her hair. | for the sake of
God, let her cover quite over.8904
It is our business
to entrust to the knowledge of God alone that which the grace of God
effects in us, lest we receive from man the reward we hope for from
God.8905
| 8905 i.e. says Oehler,
“lest we postpone the eternal favour of God, which we hope for,
to the temporal veneration of men; a risk which those virgins seemed
likely to run who, when devoted to God, used to go veiled in public,
but bareheaded in the church.” | Why do you denude before God8906
what you cover before men?8907
| 8907 i.e. in public;
see note 27, supra. |
Will you be more modest in public than in the church? If your
self-devotion is a grace of God, and you have received it,
“why do you boast,” saith he, “as if you have not
received it?”8908
Why, by your
ostentation of yourself, do you judge others? Is it that, by your
boasting, you invite others unto good? Nay, but even you yourself
run the risk of losing, if you boast; and you drive others unto the
same perils! What is assumed from love of boasting is easily destroyed.
Be veiled, virgin, if virgin you are; for you ought to blush. If you
are a virgin, shrink from (the gaze of) many eyes. Let no one wonder at
your face; let no one perceive your falsehood.8909
You do well in falsely assuming the married character, if you veil your
head; nay, you do not seem to assume it falsely, for you
are wedded to Christ: to Him you have surrendered your body; act
as becomes your Husband’s discipline. If He bids the brides of
others to be veiled, His own, of course, much more. “But each
individual man8910
is not to think
that the institution of his predecessor is to be overturned.”
Many yield up their own judgment, and its consistency, to the custom of
others. Granted that virgins be not compelled to be
veiled, at all events such as voluntarily are so should not be
prohibited; who, likewise, cannot deny themselves to be
virgins,8911
| 8911 i.e. “are known
to be such through the chastity of their manner and life”
(Oehler). | content, in the
security of a good conscience before God, to damage their own
fame.8912
Touching such, however, as are betrothed, I
can with constancy “above my small measure”8913
| 8913 Does Tertullian refer
to 2 Cor. x. 13? or does “modulus” mean, as
Oehler thinks, “my rule?” [It seems to me a very plain
reference to the text before mentioned, and to the Apostolic Canon of
not exceeding one’s Mission.] | pronounce and attest that they are to be
veiled from that day forth on which they shuddered at the first bodily
touch of a man by kiss and hand. For in them everything has been
forewedded: their age, through maturity; their flesh, through age;
their spirit, through consciousness; their modesty, through the
experience of the kiss their hope, through expectation; their mind
through volition. And Rebecca is example enough for us, who, when her
betrothed had been pointed out, veiled herself for marriage merely on
recognition of him.8914
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
