For he remembered that the time was come of which the Psalm spake, "Let us break their bands asunder, and cast off their yoke from us;" [5301] since the time when "the nations became tumultuous, and the people imagined vain counsels;" when "the kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against His Christ," [5302] in order that thenceforward man might be justified by the liberty of faith, not by servitude to the law, [5303] "because the just shall live by his faith." [5304] Now, although the prophet Habakkuk first said this, yet you have the apostle here confirming the prophets, even as Christ did. The object, therefore, of the faith whereby the just man shall live, will be that same God to whom likewise belongs the law, by doing which no man is justified. Since, then, there equally are found the curse in the law and the blessing in faith, you have both conditions set forth by [5305] the Creator: "Behold," says He, "I have set before you a blessing and a curse." [5306] You cannot establish a diversity of authors because there happens to be one of things; for the diversity is itself proposed by one and the same author. Why, however, "Christ was made a curse for us," [5307] is declared by the apostle himself in a way which quite helps our side, as being the result of the Creator's appointment. But yet it by no means follows, because the Creator said of old, "Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree," [5308] that Christ belonged to another god, and on that account was accursed even then in the law. And how, indeed, could the Creator have cursed by anticipation one whom He knew not of? Why, however, may it not be more suitable for the Creator to have delivered His own Son to His own curse, than to have submitted Him to the malediction of that god of yours,--in behalf, too, of man, who is an alien to him? Now, if this appointment of the Creator respecting His Son appears to you to be a cruel one, it is equally so in the case of your own god; if, on the contrary, it be in accordance with reason in your god, it is equally so--nay, much more so--in mine. For it would be more credible that that God had provided blessing for man, through the curse of Christ, who formerly set both a blessing and a curse before man, than that he had done so, who, according to you, [5309] never at any time pronounced either. "We have received therefore, the promise of the Spirit," as the apostle says, "through faith," even that faith by which the just man lives, in accordance with the Creator's purpose. [5310] What I say, then, is this, that that God is the object of faith who prefigured the grace of faith. But when he also adds, "For ye are all the children of faith," [5311] it becomes clear that what the heretic's industry erased was the mention of Abraham's name; for by faith the apostle declares us to be "children of Abraham," [5312] and after mentioning him he expressly called us "children of faith" also. But how are we children of faith? and of whose faith, if not Abraham's? For since "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness;" [5313] since, also, he deserved for that reason to be called "the father of many nations," whilst we, who are even more like him [5314] in believing in God, are thereby justified as Abraham was, and thereby also obtain life--since the just lives by his faith,--it therefore happens that, as he in the previous passage called us "sons of Abraham," since he is in faith our (common) father, [5315] so here also he named us "children of faith," for it was owing to his faith that it was promised that Abraham should be the father of (many) nations. As to the fact itself of his calling off faith from circumcision, did he not seek thereby to constitute us the children of Abraham, who had believed previous to his circumcision in the flesh? [5316] In short, [5317] faith in one of two gods cannot possibly admit us to the dispensation [5318] of the other, [5319] so that it should impute righteousness to those who believe in him, and make the just live through him, and declare the Gentiles to be his children through faith. Such a dispensation as this belongs wholly to Him through whose appointment it was already made known by the call of this self-same Abraham, as is conclusively shown [5320] by the natural meaning. [5321]
[5268] Ad patrocinium.
[5269] Scribit often takes the place of inquit; naturally enough as referring to the epistles.
[5270] Gal. ii. 1, 2.
[5271] Formam.
[5272] Si quando.
[5273] Gal. ii. 3.
[5274] Ex defensione.
[5275] Gal. ii. 4.
[5276] Interpolatione Scripturæ.
[5277] Qua effingerent.
[5278] Gal. ii. 4, 5.
[5279] Ipsi.
[5280] Gal. ii. 3, 4.
[5281] Incipit reddere rationem.
[5282] Contrarii utique facti. [Farrar, St. Paul, pp. 232 and 261.]
[5283] Denique.
[5284] See Conybeare and Howson, in loc.
[5285] Fuerunt propter quos crederetur.
[5286] The following statement will throw light upon the character of the two classes of Jewish professors of Christianity referred to by Tertullian: "A pharisaic section was sheltered in its bosom (of the church at Jerusalem), which continually strove to turn Christianity into a sect of Judaism. These men were restless agitators, animated by the bitterest sectarian spirit; and although they were numerically a small party, yet we know the power of the turbulent minority. But besides these Judaizing zealots, there was a large proportion of the Christians at Jerusalem, whose Christianity, though more sincere than that of those just mentioned, was yet very weak and imperfect...Many of them still only knew of a Christ after the flesh--a Saviour of Israel--a Jewish Messiah. Their minds were in a state of transition between the law and the gospel; and it was of great consequence not to shock their prejudices too rudely; lest they should be tempted to make shipwreck of their faith and renounce their Christianity altogether." These were they whose prejudices required to be wisely consulted in things which did not touch the foundation of the gospel. (Conybeare and Howson's St. Paul, People's Edition, vol. ii. pp. 259, 260.)
[5287] Gal. ii. 2.
[5288] Ex censu eorum: see Gal. ii. 9, 10.
[5289] Acts xvi. 3.
[5290] Acts xxi. 23-26.
[5291] 1 Cor. ix. 20, 22.
[5292] Gal. ii. 9.
[5293] Gal. ii. 10.
[5294] See above, book iv. chap. xiv. p. 365.
[5295] Victus: see Gal. ii. 12; or, living, see ver. 14.
[5296] Gal. ii. 12.
[5297] Gal. ii. 16.
[5298] Gal. ii. 18 (see Conybeare and Howson).
[5299] Rivi: the wadys of the East.
[5300] Luke iii. 4, 5.
[5301] Ps. ii. 3.
[5302] Ps. ii. 1, 2.
[5303] Gal. ii. 16 and iii. 11.
[5304] Hab. ii. 4.
[5305] Apud.
[5306] Deut. xi. 26.
[5307] Gal. iii. 13.
[5308] The LXX. version of Deut. xxi. 23 is quoted by St. Paul in Gal. iii. 13.
[5309] Apud te.
[5310] According to the promise of a prophet of the Creator. See Hab. ii. 4.
[5311] Gal. iii. 26.
[5312] Gal. iii. 7, 9, 29.
[5313] Gal. iii. 6.
[5314] Magis proinde: as sharing in the faith he had, "being yet uncircumcised." See Rom. iv. 11.
[5315] Patris fidei.
[5316] In integritate carnis.
[5317] Denique.
[5318] Formam: "plan" or "arrangement."
[5319] Alterius dei...dei alterius.
[5320] Revincatur.
[5321] Ipso sensu.
Chapter IV.--Another Instance of Marcion's Tampering with St. Paul's Text. The Fulness of Time, Announced by the Apostle, Foretold by the Prophets. Mosaic Rites Abrogated by the Creator Himself. Marcion's Tricks About Abraham's Name. The Creator, by His Christ, the Fountain of the Grace and the Liberty Which St. Paul Announced. Marcion's Docetism Refuted.
"But," says he, "I speak after the manner of men: when we were children, we were placed in bondage under the elements of the world." [5322] This, however, was not said "after the manner of men." For there is no figure [5323] here, but literal truth. For (with respect to the latter clause of this passage), what child (in the sense, that is, in which the Gentiles are children) is not in bondage to the elements of the world, which he looks up to [5324] in the light of a god? With regard, however, to the former clause, there was a figure (as the apostle wrote it); because after he had said, "I speak after the manner of men," he adds), "Though it be but a man's covenant, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto." [5325] For by the figure of the permanency of a human covenant he was defending the divine testament. "To Abraham were the promises made, and to his seed. He said not to seeds,' as of many; but as of one, to thy seed,' which is Christ." [5326] Fie on [5327] Marcion's sponge! But indeed it is superfluous to dwell on what he has erased, when he may be more effectually confuted from that which he has retained. [5328] "But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son" [5329] --the God, of course, who is the Lord of that very succession of times which constitutes an age; who also ordained, as "signs" of time, suns and moons and constellations and stars; who furthermore both predetermined and predicted that the revelation of His Son should be postponed to the end of the times. [5330] "It shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain (of the house) of the Lord shall be manifested"; [5331] "and in the last days I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh" [5332] as Joel says. It was characteristic of Him (only) [5333] to wait patiently for the fulness of time, to whom belonged the end of time no less than the beginning. But as for that idle god, who has neither any work nor any prophecy, nor accordingly any time, to show for himself, what has he ever done to bring about the fulness of time, or to wait patiently its completion? If nothing, what an impotent state to have to wait for the Creator's time, in servility to the Creator! But for what end did He send His Son? "To redeem them that were under the law," [5334] in other words, to "make the crooked ways straight, and the rough places smooth," as Isaiah says [5335] --in order that old things might pass away, and a new course begin, even "the new law out of Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem," [5336] and "that we might receive the adoption of sons," [5337] that is, the Gentiles, who once were not sons. For He is to be "the light of the Gentiles," and "in His name shall the Gentiles trust." [5338] That we may have, therefore the assurance that we are the children of God, "He hath sent forth His Spirit into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father." [5339] For "in the last days," saith He, "I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh." [5340]
Now, from whom comes this grace, but from Him who proclaimed the promise thereof? Who is (our) Father, but He who is also our Maker? Therefore, after such affluence (of grace), they should not have returned "to weak and beggarly elements." [5341] By the Romans, however, the rudiments of learning are wont to be called elements. He did not therefore seek, by any depreciation of the mundane elements, to turn them away from their god, although, when he said just before, "Howbeit, then, ye serve them which by nature are no gods," [5342] he censured the error of that physical or natural superstition which holds the elements to be god; but at the God of those elements he aimed not in this censure. [5343] He tells us himself clearly enough what he means by "elements," even the rudiments of the law: "Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years" [5344] --the sabbaths, I suppose, and "the preparations," [5345] and the fasts, and the "high days." [5346] For the cessation of even these, no less than of circumcision, was appointed by the Creator's decrees, who had said by Isaiah, "Your new moons, and your sabbaths, and your high days I cannot bear; your fasting, and feasts, and ceremonies my soul hateth;" [5347] also by Amos, "I hate, I despise your feast-days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies;" [5348] and again by Hosea, "I will cause to cease all her mirth, and her feast-days, and her sabbaths, and her new moons, and all her solemn assemblies." [5349] The institutions which He set up Himself, you ask, did He then destroy? Yes, rather than any other. Or if another destroyed them, he only helped on the purpose of the Creator, by removing what even He had condemned. But this is not the place to discuss the question why the Creator abolished His own laws. It is enough for us to have proved that He intended such an abolition, that so it may be affirmed that the apostle determined nothing to the prejudice of the Creator, since the abolition itself proceeds from the Creator. But as, in the case of thieves, something of the stolen goods is apt to drop by the way, as a clue to their detection; so, as it seems to me, it has happened to Marcion: the last mention of Abraham's name he has left untouched (in the epistle), although no passage required his erasure more than this, even his partial alteration of the text. [5350] "For (it is written) that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bond maid, the other by a free woman; but he who was of the bond maid was born after the flesh, but he of the free woman was by promise: which things are allegorized" [5351] (that is to say, they presaged something besides the literal history); "for these are the two covenants," or the two exhibitions (of the divine plans), [5352] as we have found the word interpreted, "the one from the Mount Sinai," in relation to the synagogue of the Jews, according to the law, "which gendereth to bondage"--"the other gendereth" (to liberty, being raised) above all principality, and power, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but in that which is to come, "which is the mother of us all," in which we have the promise of (Christ's) holy church; by reason of which he adds in conclusion: "So then, brethren, we are not children of the bond woman, but of the free." [5353] In this passage he has undoubtedly shown that Christianity had a noble birth, being sprung, as the mystery of the allegory indicates, from that son of Abraham who was born of the free woman; whereas from the son of the bond maid came the legal bondage of Judaism. Both dispensations, therefore, emanate from that same God by whom, [5354] as we have found, they were both sketched out beforehand. When he speaks of "the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free," [5355] does not the very phrase indicate that He is the Liberator who was once the Master? For Galba himself never liberated slaves which were not his own, even when about to restore free men to their liberty. [5356] By Him, therefore, will liberty be bestowed, at whose command lay the enslaving power of the law. And very properly. It was not meet that those who had received liberty should be "entangled again with the yoke of bondage" [5357] --that is, of the law; now that the Psalm had its prophecy accomplished: "Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us, since the rulers have gathered themselves together against the Lord and against His Christ." [5358] All those, therefore, who had been delivered from the yoke of slavery he would earnestly have to obliterate the very mark of slavery--even circumcision, on the authority of the prophet's prediction. He remembered how that Jeremiah had said, "Circumcise the foreskins of your heart;" [5359] as Moses likewise had enjoined, "Circumcise your hard hearts" [5360] --not the literal flesh. If, now, he were for excluding circumcision, as the messenger of a new god, why does he say that "in Christ neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision?" [5361] For it was his duty to prefer the rival principle of that which he was abolishing, if he had a mission from the god who was the enemy of circumcision.