| << | Contents | >> |
Part Fourth
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 1392
[1382] See line 2.
[1383] “Cernere quid fuerit conversa in pulvere quondam.”
Whether the meaning be that, as the soul will be able (as it should seem) to retrace all that she has experienced since she left the body, so the body, when revived, will be able as it were to look back upon all that has happened to her since the soul left her,—something after the manner in which Hamlet traces the imaginary vicissitudes of Cæsar’s dust,—or whether there be some great error in the Latin, I leave the reader to judge.
[1384] i.e., apparently remembering that she was so before.
[1385] Vivida virtus.
[1386] I rather incline to read for “hæc captiva fuit mortis,” “hæc captiva fuat mortis” =
“Is this
To be death’s thrall?”
“This” is, of course, the flesh.
[1387] For “Quod cupit his fieri, deest hoc virtute reduci,” I venture to read, “Quod capit,” etc., taking “capit” as ="capax est.” “By these,” of course, is by wisdom and art; and “virtue” ="power.”
[1388] i.e., the Evil One.
[1389] i.e., may learn to know.
[1390] Oehler’s “visus” seems to be a mistake for “vivus,” which is Migne’s reading; as in the fragment “De exsecrandis gentium diis,” we saw (sub. fin.) “videntem” to be a probable misprint for “viventem.” If, however, it is to be retained, it must mean “appearing” (i.e., in presence of God) “wholly,” in body as well as soul.
[1391] i.e., the double gift of a saved soul and a saved body.
[1392] In æternum.
Book II.—Of the Harmony of the Old and New Laws.
[1393] I have so frequently had to construct my own text (by altering the reading or the punctuation of the Latin) in this book, that, for brevity’s sake, I must ask the reader to be content with this statement once for all, and not expect each case to be separately noted.
[1394] The “foe,” as before, is Satan; his “breathing instruments” are the men whom he uses (cf. Shakespeare’s “no breather” = no man, in the dialogue between Orlando and Jacques, As you Like it, act iii. sc. 2); and they are called “renegades,” like the Evil One himself, because they have deserted from their allegiance to God in Christ.
[1395] Heresy.
[1396] Cf. John xv. 2, 4, 5, 6; Rom. xi. 17-20. The writer simply calls them “abruptos homines;” and he seems to mean excommunicated, like Marcion.
[1397] i.e., those recorded in the Old Testament.
[1398] I have followed Migne’s suggestion here, and transposed one line of the original. The reference seems to be to Isa. 64.4; 1 Cor. 2.9, where the Greek differs somewhat remarkably from the LXX.
[1399] Unless some line has dropped out here, the construction, harsh enough in my English, is yet harsher in the Latin. “Accipitur” has no subject of any kind, and one can only guess from what has gone before, and what follows, that it must mean “one Testament.”
[1400] Harsh still. It must refer to the four Gospels—the “coat without seam”—in their quadrate unity; Marcion receiving but one—St. Luke’s—and that without St. Luke’s name, and also in a mutilated and interpolated form.
[1401] This seems to be the sense. The allusion is to the fact that Marcion and his sect accepted but ten of St. Paul’s Epistles: leaving out entirely those to Timothy and Titus, and all the other books, except his one Gospel.
[1402] It seems to me that the reference here must evidently be to the Epistle to the Hebrews, which treats specially of the old covenant. If so, we have some indication as to the authorship, if not the date, of the book: for Tertullian himself, though he frequently cites the Epistle, appears to hesitate (to say the least) as to ascribing it to St. Paul.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0222 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page