Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Elucidations.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Elucidations.
————————————
I.
(About 160 years having elapsed, pp. 59, 61.)
If the First Epistle to
the Corinthians was written a.d. 57, and if our
author speaks with designed precision, and not in round numbers, the
date of this treatise should be a.d.
217—a date which I should prefer to accept. Bishop
Kaye,696
| 696 P. 40,
Kaye’s Tertullian. | however, instances capp. 7 and 9 in
the Ad Nationes as proving
his disposition to give his numbers in loose rhetoric, and not with
arithmetical accuracy. Pamelius, on the other hand, gives
a.d. 213.
On the general subject Kaye bids us read cap. 3,
with cap. 14, to grasp the argument of our enthusiast.697
| 697 P. 24,
Kaye’s Tertullian. | In few words, our author holds that St.
Paul condescends to human infirmity in permitting any marriage
whatever, pointing to a better way.698
| 698 Comp. Bacon,
Essays, No. viii., Of Marriage and Single Life. | The
apostle himself says, “The time is short;” but a hundred
and sixty years have passed since then, and why may not the Spirit of
truth and righteousness now, after so long a time, be given to animate
the adult Church to that which is pronounced the better way in
Scripture itself?
Our author seems struggling here, according to my
view, with his own rule of prescription. He would free the
doctrine from the charge of novelty by pointing it out in the Scripture
of a hundred and sixty years before. But how instinctively the
Church ruled against this sophistry, condemning in advance that whole
system of “development” which a modern Tertullian defends
on grounds quite as specious, under a Montanistic subjection that makes
a Priscilla of the Roman pontiff. Let me commend the reader to
the remarks upon Tertullian of the “judicious Hooker,” in
book ii. capp. v. 5, 6; also book iv. cap. vii. 4, 5, and
elsewhere.
II.
(Abrogated indulgence (comp. capp. 2 and 3), p. 70.)
Poor Tertullian is at war with himself in all the
works which he indites against Catholic orthodoxy. In the tract
De Exhort. Castitatis he gives one construction to
1 Cor. ix. 5, which in this he explains
away;699
| 699 Comp. Ex.
Cast., cap. viii. p. 55, supra, with the
Monogam., cap. viii. p. 65, supra. | and now he patches up his conclusion by
referring to his Montanistic “Paraclete.” In fighting
Marcion, how thoroughly he agrees with Clement of Alexandria as to the
sanctity of marriage. In the second epistle to his wife, how
beautiful his tribute to the married state, blessed by the Church, and
enjoyed in chastity. But here700
how fanatically
he would make out that marriage is but tolerated adultery! From
Tertullian himself we may prove the marriage of the clergy, and that
(de Exhort. Cast., last chapter) abstinence was voluntary and
exceptional, however praiseworthy. Also, if he here urges that
(cap. 12) even laymen should abstain from second marriages, he allows
the liberty of the clergy to marry once. He admits St.
Peter’s marriage. Eusebius proves the marriage of St.
Jude. Concerning “the grave dignity” of a single
marriage, we may concede that Tertullian proves his point, but no
further.
In England the principles of the Monogamia
were revived by the eccentric Whiston (circa a.d. 1750), and attracted considerable attention among the
orthodox,—a fact pleasantly satirized by Goldsmith in his
Vicar of Wakefield.
On the general subject comp. Chrysost., tom. iii. p.
226: “Laus Maximi, et quales ducendæ sint
uxores.”E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
