Chapter XXIX.—Parallels from the Prophets to Illustrate Christ’s Teaching in the Rest of This Chapter of St. Luke. The Sterner Attributes of Christ, in His Judicial Capacity, Show Him to Have Come from the Creator. Incidental Rebukes of Marcion’s Doctrine of Celibacy, and of His Altering of the Text of the Gospel.

Who would be unwilling that we should distress ourselves2330    Agere curam: take thought.—A.V. about sustenance for our life, or clothing for our body,2331    Luke xii. 22–28. but He who has provided these things already for man; and who, therefore, while distributing them to us, prohibits all anxiety respecting them as an outrage2332    Æmulam. against his liberality?—who has adapted the nature of “life” itself to a condition “better than meat,” and has fashioned the material of “the body,” so as to make it “more than raiment;” whose “ravens, too, neither sow nor reap, nor gather into storehouses, and are yet fed” by Himself; whose “lilies and grass also toil not, nor spin, and yet are clothed” by Him; whose “Solomon, moreover, was transcendent in glory, and yet was not arrayed like” the humble flower.2333    Flosculo: see Luke xii. 24–27. Besides, nothing can be more abrupt than that one God should be distributing His bounty, while the other should bid us take no thought about (so kindly a) distribution—and that, too, with the intention of derogating (from his liberality).  Whether, indeed, it is as depreciating the Creator that he does not wish such trifles to be thought of, concerning which neither the crows nor the lilies labour, because, forsooth, they come spontaneously to hand2334    Ultro subjectis. by reason of their very worthlessness,2335    Pro sua vilitate. will appear a little further on.  Meanwhile, how is it that He chides them as being “of little faith?”2336    Luke xii. 28. What faith?  Does He mean that faith which they were as yet unable to manifest perfectly in a god who has hardly yet revealed,2337    Tantum quod revelato. and whom they were in process of learning as well as they could; or that faith which they for this express reason owed to the Creator, because they believed that He was of His own will supplying these wants of the human race, and therefore took no thought about them?  Now, when He adds, “For all these things do the nations of the world seek after,”2338    Luke xii. 30. even by their not believing in God as the Creator and Giver of all things, since He was unwilling that they should be like these nations, He therefore upbraided them as being defective of faith in the same God, in whom He remarked that the Gentiles were quite wanting in faith.  When He further adds, “But your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things,”2339    Luke xii. 30. I would first ask, what Father Christ would have to be here understood? If He points to their own Creator, He also affirms Him to be good, who knows what His children have need of; but if He refers to that other god, how does he know that food and raiment are necessary to man, seeing that he has made no such provision for him? For if he had known the want, he would have made the provision. If, however, he knows what things man has need of, and yet has failed to supply them, he is in the failure guilty of either malignity or weakness. But when he confessed that these things are necessary to man, he really affirmed that they are good. For nothing that is evil is necessary. So that he will not be any longer a depreciator of the works and the indulgences of the Creator, that I may here complete the answer2340    Expunxerim. which I deferred giving above. Again, if it is another god who has foreseen man’s wants, and is supplying them, how is it that Marcion’s Christ himself promises them?2341    Luke xii. 31. Is he liberal with another’s property?2342    De alieno bonus. “Seek ye,” says he, “the kingdom of God, and all these things shall be added unto you”—by himself, of course. But if by himself, what sort of being is he, who shall bestow the things of another?  If by the Creator, whose all things are, then who2343    Qualis. is he that promises what belongs to another?  If these things are “additions” to the kingdom, they must be placed in the second rank;2344    Secundo gradu. and the second rank belongs to Him to whom the first also does; His are the food and raiment, whose is the kingdom.  Thus to the Creator belongs the entire promise, the full reality2345    Status. of its parables, the perfect equalization2346    Peræquatio. of its similitudes; for these have respect to none other than Him to whom they have a parity of relation in every point.2347    Cui per omnia pariaverint. We are servants because we have a Lord in our God. We ought “to have our loins girded:”2348    Luke xii. 35. in other words, we are to be free from the embarrassments of a perplexed and much occupied life; “to have our lights burning,”2349    Luke xii. 35. that is, our minds kindled by faith, and resplendent with the works of truth. And thus “to wait for our Lord,”2350    Luke xii. 36. that is, Christ. Whence “returning?” If “from the wedding,” He is the Christ of the Creator, for the wedding is His. If He is not the Creator’s, not even Marcion himself would have gone to the wedding, although invited, for in his god he discovers one who hates the nuptial bed. The parable would therefore have failed in the person of the Lord, if He were not a Being to whom a wedding is consistent. In the next parable also he makes a flagrant mistake, when he assigns to the person of the Creator that “thief, whose hour, if the father of the family had only known, he would not have suffered his house to be broken through.”2351    Luke xii. 39. How can the Creator wear in any way the aspect of a thief, Lord as He is of all mankind? No one pilfers or plunders his own property, but he2352    Sed ille potius. rather acts the part of one who swoops down on the things of another, and alienates man from his Lord.2353    A censure on Marcion’s Christ. Again, when He indicates to us that the devil is “the thief,” whose hour at the very beginning of the world, if man had known, he would never have been broken in upon2354    Suffossus. by him, He warns us “to be ready,” for this reason, because “we know not the hour when the Son of man shall come”2355    Luke xi. 40.—not as if He were Himself the thief, but rather as being the judge of those who prepared not themselves, and used no precaution against the thief. Since, then, He is the Son of man, I hold Him to be the Judge, and in the Judge I claim2356    Defendo. the Creator. If then in this passage he displays the Creator’s Christ under the title “Son of man,” that he may give us some presage2357    Portendat. of the thief, of the period of whose coming we are ignorant, you still have it ruled above, that no one is the thief of his own property; besides which, there is our principle also unimpaired2358    Salvo.—that in as far as He insists on the Creator as an object of fear, in so far does He belong to the Creator, and does the Creator’s work. When, therefore, Peter asked whether He had spoken the parable “unto them, or even to all,”2359    Luke xii. 41. He sets forth for them, and for all who should bear rule in the churches, the similitude of stewards.2360    Actorum. That steward who should treat his fellow-servants well in his Lord’s absence, would on his return be set as ruler over all his property; but he who should act otherwise should be severed, and have his portion with the unbelievers, when his lord should return on the day when he looked not for him, at the hour when he was not aware2361    Luke xii. 41–46.—even that Son of man, the Creator’s Christ, not a thief, but a Judge. He accordingly, in this passage, either presents to us the Lord as a Judge, and instructs us in His character,2362    Illi catechizat. or else as the simply good god; if the latter, he now also affirms his judicial attribute, although the heretic refuses to admit it. For an attempt is made to modify this sense when it is applied to his god,—as if it were an act of serenity and mildness simply to sever the man off, and to assign him a portion with the unbelievers, under the idea that he was not summoned (before the judge), but only returned to his own state! As if this very process did not imply a judicial act!  What folly! What will be the end of the severed ones? Will it not be the forfeiture of salvation, since their separation will be from those who shall attain salvation? What, again, will be the condition of the unbelievers?  Will it not be damnation? Else, if these severed and unfaithful ones shall have nothing to suffer, there will, on the other hand, be nothing for the accepted and the believers to obtain. If, however, the accepted and the believers shall attain salvation, it must needs be that the rejected and the unbelieving should incur the opposite issue, even the loss of salvation. Now here is a judgment, and He who holds it out before us belongs to the Creator.  Whom else than the God of retribution can I understand by Him who shall “beat His servants with stripes,” either “few or many,” and shall exact from them what He had committed to them? Whom is it suitable2363    Decet. for me to obey, but Him who remunerates?  Your Christ proclaims, “I am come to send fire on the earth.”2364    Luke xii. 49. That2365    Ille: Marcion’s Christ. most lenient being, the lord who has no hell, not long before had restrained his disciples from demanding fire on the churlish village. Whereas He2366    Iste: the Creator. burnt up Sodom and Gomorrah with a tempest of fire. Of Him the psalmist sang, “A fire shall go out before Him, and burn up His enemies round about.”2367    Ps. xcvii. 3. By Hosea He uttered the threat, “I will send a fire upon the cities of Judah;”2368    Hos. viii. 14. and2369    Vel: or, “if you please;” indicating some uncertainty in the quotation. The passage is more like Jer. xv. 14 than anything in Isaiah (see, however, Isa. xxx. 27, 30). by Isaiah, “A fire has been kindled in mine anger.” He cannot lie. If it is not He who uttered His voice out of even the burning bush, it can be of no importance2370    Viderit. what fire you insist upon being understood.  Even if it be but figurative fire, yet, from the very fact that he takes from my element illustrations for His own sense, He is mine, because He uses what is mine. The similitude of fire must belong to Him who owns the reality thereof. But He will Himself best explain the quality of that fire which He mentioned, when He goes on to say, “Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division.”2371    Luke xii. 51. It is written “a sword,”2372    Pamelius supposes that Tertullian here refers to St. Matthew’s account, where the word is μάχαιραν, on the ground that the mss. and versions of St. Luke’s Gospel invariably read διαμερισμόν. According to Rigaltius, however, Tertullian means that sword is written in Marcion’s Gospel of Luke, as if the heretic had adulterated the passage. Tertullian no doubt professes to quote all along from the Gospel of Luke, according to Marcion’s reading. but Marcion makes an emendation2373    St. Luke’s word being διαμερισμόν (division), not μάχαιραν (sword). of the word, just as if a division were not the work of the sword. He, therefore, who refused to give peace, intended also the fire of destruction.  As is the combat, so is the burning.  As is the sword, so is the flame.  Neither is suitable for its lord.  He says at last, “The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother-in-law against the daughter-in-law, and the daughter-in-law against the mother-in-law.”2374    Luke xii. 53. Since this battle among the relatives2375    Parentes. was sung by the prophet’s trumpet in the very words, I fear that Micah2376    Mic. vii. 6. must have predicted it to Marcion’s Christ!  On this account He pronounced them “hypocrites,” because they could “discern the face of the sky and the earth, but could not distinguish this time,”2377    Luke xii. 56. when of course He ought to have been recognised, fulfilling (as he was) all things which had been predicted concerning them, and teaching them so. But then who could know the times of him of whom he had no evidence to prove his existence?  Justly also does He upbraid them for “not even of themselves judging what is right.”2378    Luke xii. 57. Of old does He command by Zechariah, “Execute the judgment of truth and peace;”2379    Zech. viii. 16. by Jeremiah, “Execute judgment and righteousness;”2380    Jer. xxii. 3. by Isaiah, “Judge the fatherless, plead for the widow,”2381    Isa. i. 17. charging it as a fault upon the vine of Sorech,2382    Tertullian calls by a proper name the vineyard which Isaiah (in his chap. v.) designates “the vineyard of the Lord of hosts,” and interprets to be “the house of Israel” (ver. 7). The designation comes from ver. 2, where the original clause וַיִטַעַהז שׂר־ is translated in the Septuagint, Καὶ ἐφύτευσα ἄμπελον Σωρήκ. Tertullian is most frequently in close agreement with the LXX. that when “He looked for righteousness therefrom, there was only a cry”2383    Isa. v. 7. (of oppression). The same God who had taught them to act as He commanded them,2384    Ex præcepto. was now requiring that they should act of their own accord.2385    Ex arbitrio. He who had sown the precept, was now pressing to an abundant harvest from it. But how absurd, that he should now be commanding them to judge righteously, who was destroying God the righteous Judge! For the Judge, who commits to prison, and allows no release out of it without the payment of “the very last mite,”2386    Luke xii. 58, 59. they treat of in the person of the Creator, with the view of disparaging Him. Which cavil, however, I deem it necessary to meet with the same answer.2387    Eodem gradu. For as often as the Creator’s severity is paraded before us, so often is Christ (shown to be) His, to whom He urges submission by the motive of fear.

CAPUT XXIX.

Quis nollet curam nos agere animae de victu, et corporis de vestitu, nisi qui ista homini ante prospexit, 0432C et exinde praestans, merito curam eorum, tanquam aemulam liberalitatis suae, prohibet; qui et substantiam ipsius animae accommodavit potiorem esca, et materiam ipsius corporis figuravit potiorem tunica; cujus et corvi non serunt, nec metunt, nec in apothecas condunt, et tamen aluntur ab ipso; cujus et lilia et foenum non texunt, nec nent, et tamen vestiuntur ab ipso; cujus et Salomon gloriosissimus nec ullo tamen flosculo cultior? Caeterum nihil tam abruptum, quam ut alius praestet, alius de praestantia ejus secure agere mandet, et quidem derogator ipsius. Denique, si, quasi derogator Creatoris, non vult de ejusmodi frivolis cogitari, de quibus nec corvi nec lilia laborent, ultro scilicet pro sua vilitate subjectis, paulo post patebit. Interim cur illos modicae fidei incusat, 0433A id est cujus fidei? ejusne quam nondum poterant perfectam exhibere Deo, tantum quod velato cum maxime discentes eum, an quam hoc ipso titulo debebant Creatori, uti crederent haec illum ultro generi humano sumministrare, nec de eis cogitarent? Nam et cum subjicit, haec enim nationes mundi quaerunt, non credendo scilicet in Deum conditorem omnium et praebitorem , quos pares gentium nolebat, in eumdem Deum modicos fidei increpabat, in quem gentes incredulas notabat. Porro cum et adjicit, scit autem Pater opus esse haec vobis; prius quaeram quem patrem intelligi velit Christus. Si ipsorum Creatorem demonstrat, et bonum confirmat, qui scit quid filiis opus sit. Sin alium Deum: quomodo scit necessarium esse homini victum atque vestitum, 0433B quorum nihil praestitit? Si enim scisset, praestitisset. Caeterum, si scit quae sunt homini necessaria, nec tamen praestitit, aut malignitate aut infirmitate non praestitit. Professus autem necessaria haec homini, utique bona confirmavit. Nihil enim mali necessarium. Et non erit jam depretiator operum et indulgentiarum Creatoris, ut quod supra distuli, expunxerim. Porro, si quae necessaria scit homini, alius et prospexit et praestat, quomodo haec ipse repromittit ? An de alieno bonus est? Quaerite enim, inquit, regnum Dei, et haec vobis adjicientur. Utique ab ipso. Quod si ab ipso, qualis est qui aliena praestabit? Si a Creatore cujus et sunt, quis est qui aliena promittat? Ea si regno accedent , secundo gradu restituenda; ejus est secundus gradus, cujus et primus; 0433C ejus victus atque vestitus, cujus et regnum. Ita tota promissio Creatoris est parabolarum status, similitudinum peraequatio, si nec in alium spectant, quam cui per omnia pariaverint . Id sumus servi, Dominum enim habemus Deum. Succingere debemus lumbos, id est, expediti esse ab impedimentis laciniosae vitae et implicitae; item, lucernas ardentes habere, id est, mentes a fide accensas, et operibus veritatis relucentes; atque ita exspectare Dominum, id est Christum. Unde redeuntem? Si a nuptiis: Creatoris est, cujus nuptiae. Si non Creatoris: nec ipse Marcion invitatus ad nuptias isset, Deum suum intuens detestatorem nuptiarum. Defecit itaque parabola in persona Domini, si non esset cui nuptiae competunt. In sequenti quoque parabola satis errat, qui furem illum, cujus horam si pater familias sciret, 0434A non sineret suffodi domum suam, in personam disponit Creatoris. Fur enim Creator quomodo videri potest Dominus totius hominis? Nemo sua furatur aut suffodit, sed ille potius qui in aliena descendit, et hominem a Domino ejus alienat. Porro, cum furem nobis diabolum demonstret , cujus horam etiam in primordio si homo scisset, nunquam ab eo suffossus esset; propterea jubet ut parati sumus, quia qua non putamus hora, Filius hominis adveniet; non quasi ipse sit fur, sed judex, scilicet eorum qui se non paraverint, nec caverint furem. Ergo si ipse est Filius hominis, judicem teneo, et in judice Creatorem defendo. Si vero Christum Creatoris in nomine Filii hominis hoc loco ostendit, ut eum furem portendat, qui quando venturus sit, ignoremus, habes supra 0434B scriptum, neminem rei suae furem esse: salvo et illo, quod in quantum timendum Creatorem ingerit, in tantum illi negotium agens, Creatoris est. Itaque interroganti Petro in illos, an et in omnes parabolam dixisset; ad ipsos et ad universos qui Ecclesiis praefuturi essent, proponit actorum similitudinem, quorum qui bene tractaverit conservos absentia Domini , reverso eo omnibus bonis praeponetur; qui vero secus egerit, reverso Domino qua die non putaverit, hora qua non scierit, illo scilicet filio hominis Christo Creatoris, non fure, sed judice, segregabitur, et pars ejus cum infidelibus ponetur. Proinde igitur aut et hic judicem Dominum opponit, et illi catechizat; aut si Deum optimum, jam et illum judicem affirmat, licet nolit haereticus. Temperare enim tentant hunc sensum, 0434C cum Deo ejus vindicatur: quasi tranquillitatis sit et mansuetudinis, segregare solummodo et partem ejus cum infidelibus ponere, ac si non sit vocatus, ut statui suo redditus, quasi non et hoc ipsum judicato fiat. Stultitia! Quis erit exitus segregatorum? Nonne amissio salutis? Siquidem ab eis segregabuntur, qui salutem consequentur. Quis igitur infidelium status? Nonne damnatio? Aut si nihil patientur segregati et infideles, aeque in diverso nihil consequentur retenti et fideles. Si vero consequentur salutem retenti et fideles, hanc amittant necesse est ex diverso segregati et infideles. Hoc erit judicium, quod qui intendit, Creatoris est. Quem alium intelligam, caedentem servos paucis aut multis plagis, et prout commisit illis, ita et exigentem ab eis, quam retributorem Deum? Cui me decet obsequi, nisi remuneratori? 0435A Proclamat Christus tuus: Ignem veni mittere in terram; ille optimus, nullius gehennae Dominus; qui paulo ante discipulos, ne ignem postularent inhumanissimo viculo, coercuerat. Quando iste Sodomam et Gomorrham nimbo igneo exussit? Quando cantatum est: Ignis ante ipsum praecedet , et cremabit inimicos ejus (Ps. XCIII, 3)? Quando et per Osee comminatus est: Ignem emittam in civitates Judae (Os. VIII, 14) ? vel per Esaiam : Ignis exarsit ex indignatione mea (Is. XXX, 27)? Non mentiatur. Si non est ille qui de rubo quoque ardenti vocem suam emisit, viderit quem ignem intelligendum contendat . Etiamsi figura est, hoc ipso quod de meo elemento argumenta sensui suo sumit, meus est, qui de meis utitur. Illius erit similitudo ignis, cujus et veritas. 0435B Ipse melius interpretabitur ignis istius qualitatem, adjiciens: Putatis venisse me pacem mittere in terram? Non, dico vobis, sed separationem. Machaeram quidem scriptum est; sed Marcion emendat, quasi non et separatio opus sit machaerae. Igitur et ignem eversionis intendit, qui pacem negavit. Quale praelium, tale et incendium. Qualis machaera, talis et flamma, neutra congruens Domino. Denique: Dividetur, inquit, pater in filium, et filius in patrem; et mater in filiam, et filia in matrem; et nurus in socrum, et socrus in nurum. Hoc praelium inter parentes, si in ipsis verbis tuba cecinit prophetae, vereor ne Michaeas (Mich. VII, 6) Christo Marcionis praedicarit. Et ideo hypocritas pronuntiabat, coeli quidem et terrae faciem probantes, tempus vero 0435C illud non dinoscentes; quo scilicet adimplens omnia quae super ipsos fuerunt praedicata, nec aliter docens, debuerat agnosci. Caeterum, quis posset ejus tempora nosse, cujus per quae probaret non habebat? Merito exprobrat etiam, quod justum non a semetipsis judicarent. Olim hoc mandat per Zachariam (Zach. VIII, 16): Justum judicium et pacatorium judicate. Per Hieremiam (Jerem. XXII, 3): Facite judicium et justitiam. Per Esaiam (Is. I, 17; V. 6): Judicate pupillo, et justificate viduam; imputans etiam vineae 0436A Sorech, quod non judicium fecisset, sed clamorem. Qui ergo docuerat ut facerent ex praecepto, is exigebat ut facerent et ex arbitrio. Qui seminaverat praeceptum, ille et redundantiam ejus urgebat. Jam vero quam absurdum ut ille mandaret juste judicare, qui Deum judicem justum destruebat! Nam et judicem qui mittit in carcerem, nec ducit inde, nisi soluto etiam novissimo quadrante, in persona Creatoris obtrectationis nomine disserunt. Ad quod necesse habeo eodem gradu occurrere. Quotiescumque enim severitas Creatoris opponitur, totiens illius est Christus, cui per timorem cogit obsequium.