Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| From the Law Tertullian Comes to the Gospel. He Begins with Examples Before Proceeding to Dogmas.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter
VIII.—From the Law Tertullian Comes to the Gospel. He
Begins with Examples Before Proceeding to Dogmas.
Turning now to the law, which is properly
ours—that is, to the Gospel—by what kind of examples are we
met, until we come to definite dogmas? Behold, there immediately
present themselves to us, on the threshold as it were, the two
priestesses of Christian sanctity, Monogamy and Continence: one
modest, in Zechariah the priest; one absolute, in John the
forerunner: one appeasing God; one preaching Christ: one
proclaiming a perfect priest; one exhibiting “more than a
prophet,”639
—him, namely,
who has not only preached or personally pointed out, but even baptized
Christ. For who was more worthily to perform the initiatory rite
on the body of the Lord, than flesh similar in kind to that which
conceived and gave birth to that (body)? And indeed it was a
virgin, about to marry once for all after her delivery, who gave birth
to Christ, in order that each title of sanctity might be fulfilled in
Christ’s parentage, by means of a mother who was both virgin, and
wife of one husband. Again, when He is presented as an infant in
the temple, who is it who receives Him into his hands? who is the first
to recognise Him in spirit? A man “just and
circumspect,” and of course no digamist, (which is plain) even
(from this consideration), lest (otherwise) Christ should presently be
more worthily preached by a woman, an aged widow, and “the wife
of one man;” who, living devoted to the temple, was (already)
giving in her own person a sufficient token what sort of persons ought
to be the adherents to the spiritual temple,—that is, the
Church. Such eye-witnesses the Lord in infancy found; no
different ones had He in adult age. Peter alone do I
find—through (the mention of) his
“mother-in-law”640
,—to have been
married. Monogamist I am led to presume him by consideration of
the Church, which, built upon him,641
was destined to
appoint every grade of her Order from monogamists. The rest,
while I do not find them married, I must of necessity understand to
have been either eunuchs or continent. Nor indeed, if, among the
Greeks, in accordance with the carelessness of custom, women and wives
are classed under a common name—however, there is a name proper
to wives—shall we therefore so interpret Paul as if he
demonstrates the apostles to have had wives?642
For if he were disputing about marriages, as he does in the sequel,
where the apostle could better have named some particular example, it
would appear right for him to say, “For have we not the power of
leading about wives, like the other apostles and
Cephas?” But when he subjoins those (expressions) which
show his abstinence from (insisting on) the supply of maintenance,
saying, “For have we not the power of eating and drinking?”
he does not demonstrate that “wives” were led about by the
apostles, whom even such as have not still have the power of eating and
drinking; but simply “women,” who used to minister to them
in the same way (as they did) when accompanying the Lord.643
But further, if Christ reproves the
scribes and Pharisees, sitting in the official chair of Moses, but not
doing what they taught,644
what kind of
(supposition) is it that He Himself withal should set upon His own
official chair men who were mindful rather to enjoin—(but) not
likewise to practise—sanctity of the flesh, which (sanctity) He
had in all ways recommended to their teaching and
practising?—first by His own example, then by all other
arguments; while He tells (them) that “the kingdom of
heavens” is “children’s;”645
| 645 See Matt. xviii. 1–4; xix. 13–15;
Mark x. 13–15. |
while He associates with these (children) others who, after marriage,
remained (or became) virgins;”646
| 646 Alios post nuptias
pueros. The reference seems to be to Matt. xix. 12. | while He calls
(them) to (copy) the simplicity of the dove, a bird not merely
innocuous, but modest too, and whereof one male knows one female; while
He denies the Samaritan woman’s (partner to be) a husband, that
He may show that manifold husbandry is adultery;647
while, in the revelation of His own glory, He prefers, from among so
many saints and prophets, to have with him Moses and Elias648
| 648 See Matt. xvii. 1–8; Mark ix. 2–9;
Luke ix. 28–36. | —the one a monogamist, the other a
voluntary celibate (for Elias was nothing else than John, who came
“in the power and spirit of Elias”649
);
while that “man gluttonous and toping,” the
“frequenter of luncheons and suppers, in the company of publicans
and sinners,”650
sups once for all at
a single marriage,651
though, of course,
many were marrying (around Him); for He willed to attend
(marriages) only so often as (He willed) them to
be.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
