Chapter XXIV.—The Goodness of Marcion’s God Only Imperfectly Manifested; It Saves But Few, and the Souls Merely of These. Marcion’s Contempt of the Body Absurd.
But as God is eternal and rational, so, I think, He is perfect in all things. “Be ye perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”299 Matt. v. 48. Prove, then, that the goodness of your god also is a perfect one. That it is indeed imperfect has been already sufficiently shown, since it is found to be neither natural nor rational. The same conclusion, however, shall now be made clear300 Traducetur. by another method; it is not simply301 Nec jam. imperfect, but actually302 Immo. feeble, weak, and exhausted, failing to embrace the full number303 Minor numero. of its material objects, and not manifesting itself in them all. For all are not put into a state of salvation304 Non fiunt salvi. [Kaye, p. 347.] by it; but the Creator’s subjects, both Jew and Christian, are all excepted.305 Pauciores. Now, when the greater part thus perish, how can that goodness be defended as a perfect one which is inoperative in most cases, is somewhat only in few, naught in many, succumbs to perdition, and is a partner with destruction?306 Partiaria exitii. And if so many shall miss salvation, it will not be with goodness, but with malignity, that the greater perfection will lie. For as it is the operation of goodness which brings salvation, so is it malevolence which thwarts it.307 Non facit salvos. Since, however, this goodness) saves but few, and so rather leans to the alternative of not saving, it will show itself to greater perfection by not interposing help than by helping. Now, you will not be able to attribute goodness (to your god) in reference to the Creator, (if accompanied with) failure towards all. For whomsoever you call in to judge the question, it is as a dispenser of goodness, if so be such a title can be made out,308 Si forte (i.e., εἰ τύχοι εἴπερ ἄρα, with a touch of irony,— a frequent phrase in Tertullian. and not as a squanderer thereof, as you claim your god to be, that you must submit the divine character for determination. So long, then, as you prefer your god to the Creator on the simple ground of his goodness, and since he professes to have this attribute as solely and wholly his own, he ought not to have been wanting in it to any one. However, I do not now wish to prove that Marcion’s god is imperfect in goodness because of the perdition of the greater number. I am content to illustrate this imperfection by the fact that even those whom he saves are found to possess but an imperfect salvation—that is, they are saved only so far as the soul is concerned,309 Anima tenus. Comp.De Præscr. Hær. 33, where Marcion, as well as Apelles, Valentinus, and others, are charged with the Sadducean denial of the resurrection of the flesh, which is censured by St. Paul, 1 Cor. xv. 12. but lost in their body, which, according to him, does not rise again. Now, whence comes this halving of salvation, if not from a failure of goodness? What could have been a better proof of a perfect goodness, than the recovery of the whole man to salvation? Totally damned by the Creator, he should have been totally restored by the most merciful god. I rather think that by Marcion’s rule the body is baptized, is deprived of marriage,310 Compare De Præscr. Hær. 33, where Marcion and Apelles are brought under St. Paul’s reproach in 1 Tim. iv. 3. is cruelly tortured in confession. But although sins are attributed to the body, yet they are preceded by the guilty concupiscence of the soul; nay, the first motion of sin must be ascribed to the soul, to which the flesh acts in the capacity of a servant. By and by, when freed from the soul, the flesh sins no more.311 Hactenus. [Kaye, p. 260.] So that in this matter goodness is unjust, and likewise imperfect, in that it leaves to destruction the more harmless substance, which sins rather by compliance than in will. Now, although Christ put not on the verity of the flesh, as your heresy is pleased to assume, He still vouchsafed to take upon Him the semblance thereof. Surely, therefore, some regard was due to it from Him, because of this His feigned assumption of it. Besides, what else is man than flesh, since no doubt it was the corporeal rather than the spiritual312 Animalis (from anima, the vital principle, “the breath of life”) is here opposed to corporalis. element from which the Author of man’s nature gave him his designation?313 הָאָרָם, homo, from הָאֲרַמָה, humus, the ground; see the Hebrew of Gen. ii. 7. “And the Lord God made man of the dust of the ground,” not of spiritual essence; this afterwards came from the divine afflatus: “and man became a living soul.” What, then, is man? Made, no doubt of it, of the dust; and God placed him in paradise, because He moulded him, not breathed him, into being—a fabric of flesh, not of spirit. Now, this being the case, with what face will you contend for the perfect character of that goodness which did not fail in some one particular only of man’s deliverance, but in its general capacity? If that is a plenary grace and a substantial mercy which brings salvation to the soul alone, this were the better life which we now enjoy whole and entire; whereas to rise again but in part will be a chastisement, not a liberation. The proof of the perfect goodness is, that man, after his rescue, should be delivered from the domicile and power of the malignant deity unto the protection of the most good and merciful God. Poor dupe of Marcion, fever314 Febricitas. is hard upon you; and your painful flesh produces a crop of all sorts of briers and thorns. Nor is it only to the Creator’s thunderbolts that you lie exposed, or to wars, and pestilences, and His other heavier strokes, but even to His creeping insects. In what respect do you suppose yourself liberated from His kingdom when His flies are still creeping upon your face? If your deliverance lies in the future, why not also in the present, that it may be perfectly wrought? Far different is our condition in the sight of Him who is the Author, the Judge, the injured315 Offensum, probably in respect of the Marcionite treatment of His attributes. Head of our race! You display Him as a merely good God; but you are unable to prove that He is perfectly good, because you are not by Him perfectly delivered.
CAPUT XXIV.
Sed Deus, sicut aeternus et rationalis, ita opinor, et perfectus in omnibus: Eritis enim perfecti, quemadmodum Pater vester qui in coelis est (Matth., V, 48). 0274B Exhibe perfectam quoque bonitatem ejus. Etsi de imperfecta satis constat, quae neque naturalis invenitur, neque rationalis, nunc et alio ordine traducetur: nec jam imperfecta, imo et defecta, exigua et exhausta, minor numero materiarum suarum, quae in omnibus exhibetur. Non enim omnes salvi fiunt, sed pauciores omnibus et Judaeis et Christianis creatoris. Pluribus vero pereuntibus, quomodo perfecta defenditur bonitas ex majore parte cessatrix? paucis aliqua, pluribus nulla, cedens perditioni, partiaria exitii? Quod si plures salvi non erunt, erit jam non bonitas, sed malitia perfectior. Sicut enim bonitatis operatio est, quae facit salvos, ita malignitatis, quae non facit salvos. Magis autem non faciens salvos dum paucos facit, perfectior erit, non juvando, quam 0274C juvando. Non poteris et in Creatorem referre bonitatem, in omnes defectionem. Quem enim judicem tenes, dispensatorem si forte bonitatis ostendis intelligendum, non profusorem; quod deo tuo vindicas. Usque adeo hac sola eum praefers bonitate Creatori; quam si solam profitetur et totam, nulli deesse debuerat. Sed nolo jam de parte majore pereuntium, imperfectum bonitatis arguere deum Marcionis: sufficit ipsos, quos salvos facit, imperfectae salutis inventos, imperfectam bonitatem ejus ostendere: scilicet anima tenus salvos , carne deperditos, quae apud illum non resurgit. Unde haec dimidiatio 0275A salutis, nisi ex defectione bonitatis? Quid enim tam perfectae bonitatis, quam totum hominem redigere in salutem, totum damnatum a Creatore, totum a Deo optimo allectum? Quod sciam , et caro tinguitur apud illum , et caro de nuptiis tollitur, et caro in confessione nominis desaevitur. Sed et si carni delicta reputantur, praecedit animae reatus, et culpae principatus animae potius adscribendus, cui caro ministri nomine occurrit. Carens denique anima caro, hactenus peccat. Ita et in hoc injusta bonitas, et sic quoque imperfecta; innocentiorem substantiam relinquens in exitium, obsequio, non arbitrio delinquentem: cujus Christus etsi non induit veritatem, ut tuae haeresi visum est, imaginem tamen ejus subire dignatus est. Ipsum quod mentitus est illam, 0275B aliquid ei debuit debuisse. Quid est autem homo aliud quam caro? Si quidem nomen hominis, materia corporalis, non animalis, ab auctore sortita est: Et fecit hominem Deus, inquit (Gen., II), limum de terra, non animam; anima enim de adflatu : Et factus est homo in animam vivam. Quis? utique qui de limo. Et posuit Deus hominem in paradiso, quod finxit, non quod flavit; qui caro nunc, non qui anima. Itaque, si ita est, quo ore contendes perfectum bonitatis titulum, quae non jam a partitione speciali hominis liberandi defecit, sed a proprietate generali? Si plena est gratia et solida misericordia quae soli animae salutaris est, plus praestat haec vita, qua toti et integri fruimur. Caeterum, ex parte resurgere, mulctari erit, non liberari. Erat et illud perfectae bonitatis, ut homo liberatus 0275C in fidem Dei optimi, statim eximeretur de domicilio atque dominatu dei saevi. At nunc et febricitas, o Marcionita, et caeteros tribulos et spinas dolor carnis tuae tibi edit; nec fulminibus tantum, aut bellis, et pestibus, aliisque plagis Creatoris, sed et scorpiis ejus objectus; in quo te putas liberatum de regno ejus, cujus te muscae adhuc calcant? si de futuro erutus es, cur non et de praesenti, ut perfecte ? Alia est nostra 0276A conditio, apud auctorem, apud judicem, apud offensum principem generis. Tu tantummodo bonum deum praefers. Non potes autem perfecte bonum ostendere, a quo non perfecte liberaris.