Chapter XI.—The Opposite Extravagance Exposed.  That is Christ with a Soul Composed of Flesh—Corporeal, Though Invisible. Christ’s Soul, Like Ours, Distinct from Flesh, Though Clothed in It.

But we meet another argument of theirs, when we raise the question why Christ, in assuming a flesh composed of soul, should seem to have had a soul that was made of flesh? For God, they say, desired to make the soul visible to men, by enduing it with a bodily nature, although it was before invisible; of its own nature, indeed, it was incapable of seeing anything, even its own self, by reason of the obstacle of this flesh, so that it was even a matter of doubt whether it was born or not.  The soul, therefore (they further say), was made corporeal in Christ, in order that we might see it when undergoing birth, and death, and (what is more) resurrection. But yet, how was this possible, that by means of the flesh the soul should demonstrate itself147    Demonstraretur: or, “should become apparent.” to itself or to us, when it could not possibly be ascertained that it would offer this mode of exhibiting itself by the flesh, until the thing came into existence to which it was unknown,148    Cui latebat. that is to say, the flesh? It received darkness, forsooth, in order to be able to shine! Now,149    Denique. let us first turn our attention to this point, whether it was requisite that the soul should exhibit itself in the manner contended for;150    Isto modo. and next consider whether their previous position be151    An retro allegent. that the soul is wholly invisible (inquiring further) whether this invisibility is the result of its incorporeality, or whether it actually possesses some sort of body peculiar to itself. And yet, although they say that it is invisible, they determine it to be corporeal, but having somewhat that is invisible. For if it has nothing invisible how can it be said to be invisible? But even its existence is an impossibility, unless it has that which is instrumental to its existence.152    Per quod sit. Since, however, it exists, it must needs have a something through which it exists. If it has this something, it must be its body.  Everything which exists is a bodily existence sui generis.  Nothing lacks bodily existence but that which is non-existent. If, then, the soul has an invisible body, He who had proposed to make it153    Eam: the soul. visible would certainly have done His work better154    Dignius: i.e., “in a manner more worthy of Himself.” if He had made that part of it which was accounted invisible, visible; because then there would have been no untruth or weakness in the case, and neither of these flaws is suitable to God. (But as the case stands in the hypothesis) there is untruth, since He has set forth the soul as being a different thing from what it really is; and there is weakness, since He was unable to make it appear155    Demonstrare. to be that which it is. No one who wishes to exhibit a man covers him with a veil156    Cassidem. or a mask. This, however, is precisely what has been done to the soul, if it has been clothed with a covering belonging to something else, by being converted into flesh. But even if the soul is, on their hypothesis, supposed157    Deputetur. to be incorporeal, so that the soul, whatever it is, should by some mysterious force of the reason158    Aliqua vi rationis: or, “by some power of its own condition.” be quite unknown, only not be a body, then in that case it were not beyond the power of God—indeed it would be more consistent with His plan—if He displayed159    Demonstrare. the soul in some new sort of body, different from that which we all have in common, one of which we should have quite a different notion,160    Notitiæ. (being spared the idea that)161    Ne. He had set His mind on162    Gestisset. making, without an adequate cause, a visible soul instead of163    Ex. an invisible one—a fit incentive, no doubt, for such questions as they start,164    Istis. by their maintenance of a human flesh for it.165    In illam: perhaps “in it,” as if an ablative case, not an unusual construction in Tertullian. Christ, however, could not have appeared among men except as a man. Restore, therefore, to Christ, His faith; believe that He who willed to walk the earth as a man exhibited even a soul of a thoroughly human condition, not making it of flesh, but clothing it with flesh.

CAPUT XI.

Sed aliam argumentationem eorum convenimus, exigentes, cur animalem carnem subeundo Christus, animam carnalem videatur habuisse. Deus enim, inquiunt , gestivit animam visibilem hominibus exhibere, faciendo eam corpus, quae retro invisibilis 0774A extiterit, natura nihil, nec semetipsam videns, prae impedimento carnis hujus, ut etiam disceptaretur, nata anima an non, mortalis ne sit, an non . Itaque animam corpus effectam in Christo, ut eam et nascentem et morientem, et, quod sit amplius, resurgentem videremus. Et hoc autem quale erat , ut per carnem demonstraretur anima sibi aut nobis, quae per carnem non poterat agnosci: ut sic ostenderetur, dum id fit, cui latebat, id est caro? tenebras videlicet accepit, ut lucere posset . Denique, adhuc prius retractemus, an isto modo ostendenda fuerit anima, an in totum invisibilem eam retro allegent; utrum quasi incorporalem, an etiam habentem aliquod genus corporis proprii. Et tamen cum invisibilem dicant, corporalem eam 0774B constituunt, habentem quod invisible sit. Nihil enim habens invisibile, quomodo potest invisibilis dici? Sed ne esse quidem potest, nisi habens per quod sit. Cum autem sit, habeat necesse est aliquid, per quod est. Si habet aliquid per quod est, hoc erit corpus ejus. Omne quod est, corpus est sui generis: nihil est incorporale, nisi quod non est. Habente igitur anima invisibile corpus, qui visibilem eam facere susceperat, utique dignius id ejus visibile fecisset, quod invisibile habebatur, quia nec hic mendacium, aut infirmitas Deo competit: mendacium, si aliud animam, quam quod erat, demonstravit; infirmitas, si id quod erat demonstrare non valuit. Nemo ostendere volens hominem, cassidem aut personam ei inducit. Hoc autem factum est animae, si 0774C in carne conversa alienam induit superficiem. Sed et si incorporalis anima deputetur, ut aliqua vi rationis occulta sit quidem anima, corpus tamen non sit, quidquid est anima; proinde impossibile Deo non erat, et proposito ejus congruentius competebat, nova aliqua corporis specie eam demonstrare, quam ista communi omnium, alterius jam notitiae; ne sine caussa visibilem ex invisibili facere gestisset animam, istis scilicet quaestionibus opportunam, per carnis in illam humanae defensionem. Sed non poterat Christus inter homines nisi homo videri. Redde igitur Christo fidem suam; ut qui homo voluerit incedere, animam quoque humanae conditionis ostenderit, non faciens eam carneam, sed induens eam carne.