Against Marcion 4.25
Summary: Christ's thanksgiving that things hidden from the wise are revealed to little ones, his claim that all things were delivered to him, and his answer to the lawyer about eternal life all point to the Creator, who hid and promised to reveal through his Christ.
Textual problem in this passage: the printed text is uncertain or disputed here. See the notes.
Latin text · CSEL 47:503–508
Quis dominus caeli inuocabitur, qui non prius factor ostenditur? gratias enim, inquit, ago et confiteor, domine caeli, quod ea, quae erant abscondita sapientibus et prudentibus, reuelaueris paruulis. quae ista? et cuius? et a quo abscondita? et a quo reuelata? si a deo Marcionis abscondita et reuelata, qui omnino nihil praemiserat, in quo aliquid absconditum esse potuisset, non prophetias, non parabolas, non uisiones, non ulla rerum aut uerborum aut nominum argumenta per allegorias et figuras uel aenigmatum nebulas obumbrata? sed ipsam magnitudinem sui absconderat, quam cum maxime per Christum reuelabat. satis inique. quid enim deliquerant sapientes et prudentes, ut absconderetur illis deus, ad quem cognoscendum non suffecerat sapientia atque prudentia illorum, nulla uia data ab ipso per aliquam operum praedicationem uel uestigia, per quae sapientes atque prudentes deducerentur? quamquam et si in aliquo deliquissent erga deum ignotum pone, nunc notum, non tamen zeloten eum experiri debuissent, qui dissimilis creatoris inducitur. igitur si nec materias praemiserat, in quibus aliquid occultasset, nec reos habuerat, a quibus occultasset, nec debuerat occultasse, etiam si habuisset, iam nec reuelator ipse erit, qui absconditor non fuit, — ita nec dominus caeli nec pater Christi — sed ille, in quem competunt omnia. nam et abscondit praemisso obscuritatis propheticae instrumento, cuius intellectum fides mereretur — nisi enim credideritis, non intellegetis — et reos habuit sapientes atque prudentes ex ipsis operibus tot ac tantis intellegibilem deum non requirentes uel perperam in illum philosophantes et ingenia haereticis sumministrantes, et nouissime zelotes est. denique olim hoc per Esaiam contionabatur, quod Christus gratulatur: perdam sapientiam sapientium et prudentiam prudentium celabo, sicut et alibi tam abscondisse (se) quam reuelaturum esse significat: et dabo illis thesauros absconditos, inuisibiles aperiam illis, et rursus: quis alius disiciet signa uentriloquorum et diuinationes ex corde, auertens in posteriora sapientes et cogitationes eorum infatuans? si autem et Christum suum inluminatorem nationum designauit: posui te in lucem nationum, quas interpretamur in nomine paruulorum, sensu scilicet retro paruulos et imprudentia infantes, iam uero et humilitate fidei pusillas, facilius utique credemus eundem etiam paruulis reuelasse per Christum, qui et retro absconderit et per Christum reuelationem repromiserit. aut si deus Marcionis ea, quae a creatore abscondita retro fuerant, patefecit, ergo iam creatori negotium gessit, res eius edisserens. sed (in destructionem, inquis, (uti traduceret eas. ergo illis traduxisse debuerat, quibus creator abscondidit, sapientibus et prudentibus. si enim benignitate faciebat, illis erat adgnitio praestanda, quibus fuerat negata, non paruulis, quibus nihil creator inuiderat. et tamen usque adhuc, puto, probamus extructionem potius legis et prophetarum inueniri in Christo quam destructionem. Omnia sibi tradita dicit a patre. credas, si creatoris est Christus, cuius omnia, et quia non minori se tradidit omnia filio creator quae per eum condidit, per sermonem suum scilicet. ceterum si oeconomus ille, quae sunt (omnia), quae illi a patre sunt tradita? quae sunt creatoris? ergo bona sunt quae pater filio tradidit, et bonus iam creator, cuius omnia bona sunt, et ille iam non bonus, qui in aliena bona inuasit, ut filio traderet, docens alieno abstinere. certe mendicissimus qui nec filium unde ditaret habuit nisi de alieno. aut si nihil de creatoris traditum est ei a patre, [et quomodo hominem creatoris sibi uindicat? aut si solus homo ei traditus est, omnia homo non est. scriptura autem (omnium) edicit traditionem filio factam. sed et si (omnia) ad hominum genera, id est ad omnes nationes, interpretaberis, et has filio tradidisse creatoris est: dabo tibi gentes hereditatem tuam et possessionem tuam terminos terrae. aut si habebat et ipse aliqua sua (omnia), quae filio traderet pariter cum homine creatoris, ostende unum aliquod ex (omnibus) in fidem, in exemplum, ne tam merito non credam eius esse omnia, cuius nihil uideo, quam merito credam etiam quae non uideo eius esse, cuius sunt uniuersa, quae uideo. sed nemo scit, qui sit pater, nisi filius, et qui sit filius, nisi pater, [nemo enim scit patrem nisi filius et filium nisi pater] et cuicumque filius reuelauerit, atque ita Christus ignotum deum praedicauit. hinc enim et alii haeretici fulciuntur, opponentes creatorem omnibus notum, et Israheli secundum familiaritatem et nationibus secundum naturam. et quomodo ipse testatur nec Israheli cognitum se — Israhel autem me non cognouit et populus me non intellexit — nec nationibus? ecce enim nec de nationibus, inquit, nemo. propter quod et illas stillicidium situlae deputauit et Sionem tamquam speculam in uinea derelictam. uide ergo, an confirmatio sit propheticae uocis exprobrantis ignorantiam in deum humanam, quae fuerit ad filium usque. nam et ideo subtexuit ab eo cognosci patrem, cui filius reuelauerit, quoniam ipse erat, qui positus a patre in lumen nationum adnuntiabatur, utique de deo inluminandarum, etiam Israhelis, utique per agnitionem dei pleniorem. - ita non proficient argumenta in fidem dei alterius, quae creatori competere possunt, quia quae non competent creatori, haec poterunt in fidem proficere dei alterius. Si et sequentia inspicias: beati oculi, qui uident quae uidetis: dico enim uobis, quia prophetae non uiderunt quae uos uidetis, de superiore sensu descendunt adeo: neminem, ut decuit, deum cognouisse, quando nec prophetae uidissent quae sub Christo uidebantur, nam si non meus esset Christus, nec prophetarum hoc in loco mentionem conlocasset. quid enim mirum, si non uiderant res dei ignoti et tanto post aeuo reuelati, si non erant consecuti repraesentationem eorum, quae numquam praedicarant? quae autem fuisset felicitas eorum, qui tunc uidebant, [quae alii merito uidisse non poterant] nisi quoniam qui poterant uidisse qui(dem) dei sui res, quas etiam praedicauerant, non tamen uiderant? haec enim felicitas erit illorum, quia uidebant quae alii tantum praedicauerant. denique ostendemus et iam ostendimus, ea uisa in Christo, quae fuerant praedicata, abscondita tamen et ab ipsis prophetis, ut absconderentur et a sapientibus atque prudentibus saeculi. In euangelio ueritatis legis doctor dominum adgressus: quid faciens, inquit, uitam aeternam consequar? in haeretico uita* solummodo posita est, sine aeternae mentione, ut doctor de ea uita uideatur consuluisse, quae in lege promittitur a creatore longaeua, et dominus ideo illi secundum legem responsum dedisse: diliges dominum deum tuum ex toto corde tuo et ex tota anima tua et totis uiribus tuis, quoniam de legis uita sciscitabatur. sed sciebat utique legis doctor, quo pacto uitam legalem consequi posset, ut non de ea interrogasset, cuius regulas etiam docebat. sed quia et mortui iam suscitabantur a Christo, et suscitatus ad spem aeternae uitae per exempla recidiuae ** ne plus aliquid obseruationis exigeret sublimior spes, idcirco + consuluit de aeternae uitae consecutione. itaque dominus, ut nec ipse alius nec aliud nouum inferens praeceptum, quam quod principaliter ad omnem salutem et utramque uitam facit, ipsum caput ei legis opponit, omnifariam diligendi dominum deum suum. denique si de uita longaeua et ille consuluit et Christus respondit, quae sit penes creatorem, non de aeterna, quae sit penes Marcionis deum, quomodo consequetur aeternam? non utique eodem modo, quo et longaeuam. pro differentia enim mercedum operarum quoque credenda distantia est. ergo non ex dilectione dei sui consequentur uitam aeternam Marcionitae, sicut longaeuam dilector creatoris. sed quale est, ut non magis diligendus sit qui aeternam pollicetur, si diligendus est qui longaeuam repromittit? ergo eiusdem erit utraque uita, cum eadem est utrique uitae captandae disciplina, — quod creator docet, idem Christo opus est, diligi ut praestet, — interueniente et hic illa praescriptione, qua facilius apud eum debeant credi maiora, apud quem minora praecedunt, quam apud eum, cui nullam de maioribus fidem aliqua minora praeparauerunt. uiderit nunc, si (aeternam) nostri addiderunt: hoc mihi satis est, quod Christus, ille aeternae, non longae(uae) uitae inuitator, de longaeua consultus, quam destruebat, non (ad) aeternam potius exhortatus est hominem, quam inferebat. quid, oro te, fecisset Christus creatoris, si creatori diligendo aedificauerat hominem qui non erat creatoris? credo, negasset diligendum creatorem.
English · Claude translation
Who will be invoked as Lord of heaven, who has not first been shown to be its maker? For he says: “I thank you and confess you, Lord of heaven, because you have revealed to little ones the things that were hidden from the wise and prudent.” What things? And whose? Hidden by whom? Revealed by whom? By Marcion's god, hidden and revealed, when he had put forth nothing at all beforehand in which anything could have been hidden: no prophecies, no parables, no visions, no proofs of things or words or names overshadowed by allegories and figures or by the clouds of riddles? But he had hidden, they say, his very greatness, which he was just then revealing through Christ. That is unjust enough. For what wrong had the wise and prudent done, that God should be hidden from them, when their wisdom and prudence had not been enough to know him, since he himself had given them no way, through any proclamation of his works or any traces, by which the wise and prudent might be led to him? And even if they had offended in some way against a god unknown — suppose it — and now known, still they ought not to have found him jealous, since he is presented as unlike the Creator. So if he had neither put forth materials in which he could have concealed something, nor had guilty persons from whom to conceal it, nor ought to have concealed it even if he had had them, then neither will the revealer be he who was not the concealer — and so neither Lord of heaven nor Father of Christ — but rather that other one, to whom all these things apply. For he both concealed, having first put forth the instrument of prophetic obscurity, the understanding of which faith would earn — for “unless you believe, you will not understand” — and he had guilty persons, the wise and prudent, who did not seek God, though he could be understood from so many and such great works, or philosophized wrongly about him and supplied the heretics with their ideas; and lastly he is jealous. In fact long ago he proclaimed through Isaiah what Christ gives thanks for: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and I will hide the prudence of the prudent,” just as elsewhere too he indicates both that he has hidden (himself) and that he will reveal: “And I will give them hidden treasures; I will open to them invisible things,” and again: “Who else will scatter the signs of ventriloquists and divinations from the heart, turning the wise backward and making their thoughts foolish?” And if he also designated his Christ as the enlightener of the nations — “I have set you for a light of the nations” — whom we interpret under the name of little ones, since formerly they were little ones in understanding and infants in imprudence, and now are small also in the humility of faith, we shall surely more easily believe that the same one who formerly hid, and who promised a revelation through Christ, has also revealed to little ones through Christ. Or if Marcion's god laid open the things that had formerly been hidden by the Creator, then he was already doing the Creator's business, expounding his affairs. But (it was for their destruction, you say,) to expose them. Then he ought to have exposed them to those from whom the Creator hid them, the wise and prudent. For if he was acting out of kindness, knowledge ought to have been granted to those to whom it had been denied, not to the little ones, from whom the Creator had withheld nothing. And yet up to now, I think, we are proving that what is found in Christ is the building up of the law and the prophets rather than their destruction.
He says that all things have been delivered to him by the Father. You may believe it if Christ is the Creator's, to whom all things belong, and because the Creator delivered to no lesser son all the things he founded through him, through his Word, that is. But if he is that other steward, what are the (all things) that were delivered to him by the Father? Are they the Creator's? Then what the Father delivered to the Son are good things, and the Creator is now good, since all his things are good; and that other is now not good, since he invaded another's goods to deliver them to his son, he who teaches us to keep our hands off what is another's. Surely he is the most beggarly of all, who had nothing with which to enrich even his son except from another's property. Or if nothing of the Creator's was delivered to him by the Father, how does he claim for himself the Creator's man? Or if only man was delivered to him, man is not all things. But Scripture declares that a delivering of (all things) was made to the Son. And even if you interpret (all things) of the races of men, that is, of all the nations, to deliver these too to the Son is the Creator's act: “I will give you the nations as your inheritance, and the ends of the earth as your possession.” Or if he too had some (all things) of his own to deliver to his son together with the Creator's man, show me some single one of those (all things) as a pledge, as a sample, so that I may not refuse to believe, with as much reason, that all things belong to him of whom I see nothing, as I believe, with reason, that even the things I do not see belong to him to whom belong all the things I do see.
But “no one knows who the Father is except the Son, and who the Son is except the Father” “and anyone to whom the Son reveals him”; and so Christ preached an unknown god. For other heretics too prop themselves up on this, objecting that the Creator is known to all, to Israel by familiarity and to the nations by nature. And how is it that he himself testifies that he was known neither to Israel — “But Israel has not known me, and the people has not understood me” — nor to the nations? “For behold,” he says, “of the nations there is no one.” That is why he counted them as a drop from a bucket, and Zion as a watchtower left in a vineyard. See then whether this is not a confirmation of the prophetic voice reproaching mankind's ignorance of God, which lasted right up to the Son. For this is why he added that the Father is known by the one to whom the Son reveals him: because he was the very one who was announced as set by the Father for a light of the nations, which were to be enlightened about God, surely, and a light of Israel too, surely through a fuller knowledge of God. So arguments that can apply to the Creator will not serve faith in another god, since only those that do not apply to the Creator could serve faith in another god.
If you look at what follows as well, “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see; for I tell you that the prophets did not see what you see,” this too comes down from the preceding sense: that no one had known God as he ought, since not even the prophets had seen what was being seen under Christ. For if Christ were not mine, he would not have made mention of the prophets in this passage. For what wonder is it if they had not seen the things of a god unknown and revealed after so long an age, if they had not attained the display of things they had never foretold? But what would the happiness of those who then saw have been, except that those who could have seen the things of their own God, which they had even foretold, nevertheless had not seen them? For this will be the happiness of the former, that they saw what others had only foretold. In short, we shall show, and have already shown, that what was seen in Christ had been foretold, yet hidden even from the prophets themselves, so that it might be hidden also from the wise and prudent of the world.
In the gospel of truth a lawyer approached the Lord and said: “By doing what shall I obtain eternal life?” In the heretic's gospel only “life” is set down, without mention of “eternal,” so that the lawyer may seem to have asked about the life promised in the law by the Creator, a long life, and the Lord therefore to have answered him according to the law, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength,” since he was asking about the life of the law. But the lawyer surely knew how the life of the law could be obtained, so that he would not have asked about it, since he himself taught its rules. But because the dead were already being raised by Christ, and, roused to the hope of eternal life by examples of a return to life, … lest the loftier hope should demand some further observance, therefore he asked how eternal life is to be attained. So the Lord, as one who was himself no other and was bringing in no other new commandment than the one that above all makes for all salvation and for both lives, sets before him the very head of the law, to love the Lord his God in every way. In fact, if the lawyer asked, and Christ answered, about the long life which is in the Creator's gift, not about the eternal life which is in the gift of Marcion's god, how will he obtain eternal life? Surely not in the same way as long life. For with the difference of rewards, a difference of works too must be believed. Then the Marcionites will not obtain eternal life by loving their god, as the lover of the Creator obtains long life. But how can it be that the one who promises eternal life is not to be loved all the more, if the one who promises long life is to be loved? So both lives will belong to the same God, since the discipline for gaining both lives is the same — what the Creator teaches, Christ too needs: that he be loved, in order to grant them. Here too that prescription intervenes, by which greater things ought more easily to be believed of the one with whom lesser things come first than of one for whom no lesser things have prepared any faith in the greater. Let it be their concern now whether our people added “eternal”: this is enough for me, that Christ, the one who invites to eternal and not to long life, when asked about long life, which he was abolishing, did not rather urge the man toward eternal life, which he was bringing in. What, I ask you, would the Creator's Christ have done, if one who was not the Creator's had built man up to love the Creator? I suppose he would have denied that the Creator is to be loved.
About this passage
Notes
Translation notes
- The quotations and allusions are Luke 10:21–27; Isa 7:9 (in the Greek form); Isa 29:14; Isa 45:3; Isa 44:25 (in a Greek-derived form); Isa 42:6; Ps 2:8; Isa 1:3; Isa 41:28; Isa 40:15; Isa 1:8; Deut 6:5. “The gospel of truth” is the church's Luke, set against Marcion's edited gospel, which (as Tertullian reports) read “life” instead of “eternal life” in Luke 10:25. The digital text marks a gap (**) in the sentence on the dead being raised; it is incomplete. The editor deletes as spurious et (before quomodo hominem creatoris), a repetition of the saying (nemo enim scit patrem nisi filius et filium nisi pater), and the clause quae alii merito uidisse non poterant; they are left out of the translation.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (hyphenated word split in the digital text; point misread for comma in the digital text; stray characters in the digital text; stray point in the digital text): sapientes atque prudentes. deducerentur → sapientes atque prudentes deducerentur; disiciet. signa → disiciet signa; exprobrantis. ignorantiam → exprobrantis ignorantiam; uidebantur.I, nam → uidebantur, nam; polli- cetur → pollicetur; hoc mihi. satis est → hoc mihi satis est; aeternae. non longae → aeternae, non longae.
Cite this passage
Tertullian, Marc. 4.25 (trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-marcionem/4/25/).
Plain text
Tertullian, Marc. 4.25 (trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-marcionem/4/25/).
Download citation:BibTeX ·RIS (Zotero, EndNote)
Whole work:BibTeX ·RIS ·Markdown text