PL 2 · cols. 219–264

Tertullian, Liber adversus Hermogenem

Editors' preface

PL 2:219

Q. SEPT. FLOR. TERTULLIANI

OF Q. SEPT. FLOR. TERTULLIAN

LIBER.

BOOK

ADVERSUS HERMOGENEM.

AGAINST HERMOGENES

ARGUMENTUM. — Hermogenes iste natione fuit Afer, professione pictor, alius omnino ab eo de quo cum Phygello seu Phileto, loquitur Apostolus, II ad Timoth. I. Christianum se primum professus, vafritiem et subdolum nationis animum testatus est, cum in gentilium philosophiam degener incurrit, et Stoicorum deliria secutus est. Hermogenes adhuc vivens docebat dari materiam aeternam, hoc innixus principio, bonum et optimum esse Deum, qui bona atque optima tam velit facere, quam scit, imo nihil non bonum, atque optimum et velle eum, et sapere..... inveniri autem et mala ab eo facta utique non ex arbitrio et voluntate; oportere igitur ex vitio alicujus rei factum ex materia esse sine dubio. Cui reponebat Tertullianus Hermogenem duos deos inferre, dum materiam parem Deo infert. Deum autem unum esse oportet, unicum autem esse non poterit, cui aliquid adaequabitur, adaequabitur autem Deo materia, cum aeterna censetur. Similiter nec omnipotens Deus, qui materiae indiguit, et materia egenti Deo se praestitit minori, et

ARGUMENT. — This Hermogenes was an African by nation and a painter by profession, wholly other than the one of whom, together with Phygellus or Philetus, the Apostle speaks (2 Tim. 1). Having first professed himself a Christian, he gave proof of the craftiness and underhand spirit of his nation when, degenerate, he fell into the philosophy of the gentiles and followed the ravings of the Stoics. Hermogenes, while still living, taught that there is an eternal matter, relying on this principle: that God is good and best, Who wills to make things good and best as far as He knows how; indeed, that there is nothing not good and best that He either wills or knows..... but that evil things too are found to have been made by Him, assuredly not by His choice and will; therefore [evil] must without doubt have been made from the fault of some thing, from matter. To this Tertullian replied that Hermogenes brings in two gods, in that he brings in a matter equal to God. But God must be one; and He could not be unique to Whom anything will be made equal; and matter will be made equal to God when it is reckoned eternal. Likewise God is not omnipotent Who needed matter, and matter offered itself to a God in need of it, as to a lesser one, and

Editors' notes and page, col. 219

Footnotes

(printed under page 114)

(80) ‹Habes ipsum› · call in col 219

Habet Seml.

"Habet" (has): Semler.

(printed under page 114)

(81) ‹dum tradit› · call in col 219

Tradet Seml.

"Tradet" (will hand over): Semler.

(printed under page 114)

(82) ‹descendit in inferiora› · call in col 219

Inferiora alii.

"Inferiora" (the lower parts): others.

(printed under page 114)

(83) ‹Hunc videt› · call in col 219

Vidit Fran.

"Vidit" (saw): the Franeker edition.

(printed under page 114)

(84) ‹cum lapidatur› · call in col 219 (printed there as a second 83)

Lapidaretur Rhen.

"Lapidaretur" (was being stoned): Rhenanus.

(printed under page 114)

(85) ‹tertium nomen› · call in col 219

Numen Paris.

"Numen" (divinity): the Paris edition.

(printed under page 114)

(86) ‹tertium gradum majestatis› · call in col 220

Et tertium gradum majestatis omitt. Seml.

Semler omits "et tertium gradum majestatis" (and the third degree of majesty).

(printed under page 114)

(87) ‹deductorem› · call in col 220

Deductoris Rhen.

"Deductoris" (of the guide): Rhenanus.

(printed under page 114)

(88) ‹Judaicae fidei ista res› · call in col 220

Instares conjic. Seml.

"Instares" (you would press on): Semler's conjecture.

(printed under page 114)

(47) ‹sermones novae prophetiae› · call in col 220 (Commentarius)

Sermones novae prophetiae. Montani vaticinia, quibus occaecatus Tertullianus, hic ab eodem innuuntur. Le Pr.

The discourses of the new prophecy. Montanus's prophecies, by which Tertullian was blinded, are hinted at here by him. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 114)

Page

gap: the text in this column is not set: output filter, L01 L02 L04 and L05 blocked, these fresh columns were not written (L01 wrote 181 before its block, L03 wrote 206) (2026-10-18). Marked gap (Ray's ruling); not retried.
other: page shared with PL002/adversus_praxean; this file is a copy of its notes (QA keeps this unit's own)
other: the gap line above concerns the Adversus Praxean text of this column; this unit's part (the full-width title and the Argumentum, both halves of the page) is set in parts/c219_a.md (Q2, 2026-10-18).

PL 2:220

Editors' notes and page, col. 220

Footnotes

(89) ‹Nos credimus testimonio› · call in col 220

Testimonium Seml.

"Testimonium" (the testimony): Semler.

(printed under page 114)

Page

gap: the text in this column is not set: output filter, L01 L02 L04 and L05 blocked, these fresh columns were not written (L01 wrote 181 before its block, L03 wrote 206) (2026-10-18). Marked gap (Ray's ruling); not retried.
other: page shared with PL002/adversus_praxean; this file is a copy of its notes (QA keeps this unit's own)

PL 2:221

invalido, et minus idoneo de nihilo facere quae, velit. Praeterea si materia mala, et aeterna, profecto malum inevitabile, et necessarium; si mutabilis in bonum, ergo non aeterna, et hic auctor mali Deus, qui cum debuisset omnia ex materia protulisse, aut tantum bona, protulisset etiam mala, utique aut volens esse mala, si poterat efficere ne essent, aut non volens efficere omnia bona, si voluit, et non fecit. LUMP.

weak and less capable of making from nothing what He would. Moreover, if matter is evil and eternal, evil is certainly inevitable and necessary; if it is changeable into good, then it is not eternal, and here God is the author of evil, Who, when He ought to have brought forth all things from matter, or only good things, brought forth evil things as well, surely either willing them to be evil, if He was able to bring it about that they should not be, or not willing to make all things good, if He willed it and did not do it. LUMP.

CAPUT PRIMUM.

CHAPTER I.

Solemus haereticis compendii gratia de posteritate praescribere. In quantum enim veritatis regula prior, quae etiam futuras haereses praenuntiavit, in tantum posteriores quaeque doctrinae haereses praejudicabuntur, quia sunt quae futurae veritatis antiquiore regula praenuntiabantur. Hermogenis autem doctrina tam novella est; denique ad hodiernum homo in saeculo, et natura quoque haereticus etiam turbulentus, qui loquacitatem facundiam existimet, et impudentiam constantiam deputet, et maledicere singulis, officium bonae conscientiae judicet. Praeterea pingit illicite, nubit assidue; legem Dei in libidinem defendit, in artem contemnit, bis falsarius, et cauterio et stylo; totus adulter, et praedicationis et carnis siquidem et nubentium contagio foetet, nec ipse apostolicus Hermogenes in regula perseveraverit. Sed viderit persona, cum doctrina mihi quaestio est. Christum Dominum non alium videtur aliter cognoscere, alium tamen facit quem aliter cognoscit: imo totum quod est Deus aufert, nolens illum ex nihilo universa fecisse. A Christianis enim conversus ad philosophos, de Ecclesia in Academiam et Porticum, inde sumpsit a Stoicis materiam cum Domino ponere, quae ipsa semper fuerit

We are accustomed, for brevity's sake, to enter a prescription against heretics on the ground of their lateness. For inasmuch as the rule of truth is earlier, which foretold that there would also be heresies to come, so far will all later doctrines be prejudged as heresies, because they are the ones which, as things to come, were foretold by the more ancient rule of truth. Now the doctrine of Hermogenes is so very new; in short, the man is in the world to this day, and by nature too a heretic, turbulent besides, who takes loquacity for eloquence, and counts impudence as constancy, and judges reviling everyone to be the duty of a good conscience. Moreover, he paints unlawfully, he marries continually; he defends the law of God in the cause of lust, he despises it in the cause of his art; twice a forger, both with the cautery and with the pen; wholly an adulterer, both of preaching and of the flesh, since he stinks too with the contagion of those who marry; nor did the apostolic Hermogenes himself persevere in the rule. But let the person look to himself; my question is with the doctrine. He seems to acknowledge Christ the Lord as no other, though in another way; yet he makes Him another, whom he acknowledges in another way: nay, he takes away all that God is, refusing that He made all things out of nothing. For, turned from the Christians to the philosophers, from the Church to the Academy and the Porch, he took from there, from the Stoics, the placing of matter alongside the Lord, matter which itself was always

Editors' notes and page, col. 221

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ¹ ‹anchor: praenuntiavit› · call in col 221 Renuntiavit Seml.

Renuntiavit ("renounced"): Semler.

² ‹anchor: Pingit illicite› · call in col 221 Licite Rhen. Jun. Seml. Jun. interpretatur licenter s. licentiose.

Licite ("lawfully"): Rhenanus, Junius, Semler. Junius interprets it as "licenter" or "licentiose" ("licentiously").

³ ‹anchor: Christum Dominum non alium› · call in col 221 Christum Dominum non alium videtur, sed aliter cognoscere cod. Vatican. Christum Dominum, non alium, videtur aliter cognoscere, alium tamen Fran. Jun.

"He seems to know Christ the Lord as not another, but otherwise": the Vatican codex. "He seems to know Christ the Lord, not another, otherwise, yet another": Franciscus Junius.

⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Ait Jun. male.

Ait ("he says"): Junius, wrongly.

⁵ ‹anchor: Porro› · call in col 222 Id porro Jun.

Id porro ("that, moreover"): Junius.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 115)

(1) ‹anchor: Loquacitatem facundiam existimet› · call in col 221

(printed under page 115) (1) Loquacitatem facundiam existimet. Errantium vulgare vitium est, ut sua loquacitate enecent auditores, dum facundi haberi volunt. « Natura rerum est, inquit Symmachus, lib. I, epist. 76, ut qui balbutiant plus loquantur; affectant enim copiam pudore defectus. » Le Pr.

He takes talkativeness for eloquence. It is a common fault of those who go astray to wear their hearers to death with their talk, while they want to be thought eloquent. "It is in the nature of things," says Symmachus, book 1, letter 76, "that those who stammer talk the more; for out of shame at their lack they affect abundance." Le Prieur.

(printed under page 115)

(2) ‹anchor: Pingit illicite› · call in col 221

(printed under page 115) (2) Pingit illicite. Hermogenes erat pictor. Pingebat autem illicite, quia post susceptum Christiani nomen, nihilominus pingebat simulacra deorum, utique falsorum. Rig.

He paints unlawfully. Hermogenes was a painter. And he painted unlawfully, because after taking up the name of Christian he nonetheless went on painting images of the gods, false gods at that. Rigault.

(printed under page 115)

(3) ‹anchor: Nubit assidue› · call in col 221

(printed under page 115) (3) Nubit assidue. Mutatis subinde conjugiis, etenim polygamiae favebat. Rig.

He marries continually. Changing his marriages again and again; for he favoured polygamy. Rigault.

(printed under page 115)

(4) ‹anchor: Legem Dei in libidinem defendit› · call in col 221

(printed under page 115) (4) Legem Dei in libidinem defendit. Libidini suae praetendit legem Dei, Crescite et multiplicamini. Rig. — Legem Dei in libidinem defendit, etc. Is polygamiam, quam exosam habebat Septimius, tuebatur, ut inde criminibus suis patrocinaretur; atque in hanc rem Dei legem adhibebat, quam turpissimarum rerum pictura contaminabat, seque praevaricationis hoc pacto ut falsarium convincebat. Le Pr.

He defends the law of God in the interest of lust. He holds up the law of God, Increase and multiply, as a screen for his lust. Rigault. — He defends the law of God in the interest of lust, etc. He upheld polygamy, which Septimius [Tertullian] detested, so as to find in it a defence for his own misdeeds; and to this end he brought in the law of God, which he defiled by painting the foulest things, and in this way convicted himself of transgression, as a falsifier. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 115)

(5) ‹anchor: In artem contemnit› · call in col 221

(printed under page 115) (5) In artem contemnit. Eamdem scilicet legem arte sua contemnit, pingens simulacra, quod lex vetabat, Non facies idolum. Rig.

He scorns it for his art. That is, he scorns the same law by his art, painting images, which the law forbade: You shall not make an idol. Rigault.

(printed under page 115)

(6) ‹anchor: Bis falsarius, cauterio et stylo› · call in col 221

(printed under page 115) (6) Bis falsarius, cauterio et stylo. Falsarius, cauterio suo pictorio, discolores ceras inurens exprimendis falsorum numinum simulacris. Falsarius etiam, Scripturis stylo haeretico depravatis. Rig. — Cauterio. Quia ceris pingebat, et picturam inurebat cauterio. Quod genus picturae, encaustica, sive encaustum, dicebatur. Plinius, XXXV, 2; Vitruvius, VII, 9; Marcianus, lib. XVII De instr. vel instrum. leg. Rig.

Twice a falsifier, with branding-iron and pen. A falsifier with his painter's branding-iron, burning in coloured waxes to render the images of false deities. A falsifier also, having corrupted the Scriptures with a heretical pen. Rigault. — With the branding-iron. Because he painted in waxes and burned the picture in with a cautery. This kind of painting was called encaustic, or encaustum. Pliny, 35.2; Vitruvius, 7.9; Marcianus, book 17, On a legacy of equipment or furnishings (De instructo vel instrumento legato). Rigault.

(printed under page 115)

(7) ‹anchor: Totus adulter, et praedicationis et carnis› · call in col 221

(printed under page 115) (7) Totus adulter, et praedicationis et carnis. Adultera Hermogenis caro, quae assidue nubebat: « Quae toties nubit, non nubit, adultera lege est. » Adultera quoque Hermogenis praedicatio, quia haeresi sua fidem pacemque Ecclesiae corruperat. Rig.

An adulterer through and through, both of preaching and of flesh. Hermogenes' flesh was adulterous, for it married continually: "She who marries so often does not marry; she is an adulteress by law." Hermogenes' preaching too was adulterous, because by his heresy he had corrupted the faith and the peace of the Church. Rigault.

(printed under page 115)

(8) ‹anchor: Siquidem et nubentium contagio foetet› · call in col 221

(printed under page 115) (8) Siquidem et nubentium contagio foetet. Explicat quod supra dixit, Hermogenem esse carnis adulterum, siquidem et ipse inter frequentium nuptiarum contagia subando foeteret. Rig.

Since he even stinks of the contagion of those who marry. He explains what he said above, that Hermogenes was an adulterer of the flesh, since he himself stank from rutting amid the contagion of frequent marriages. Rigault.

(printed under page 115)

(9) ‹anchor: Nec ipse apostolicus Hermogenes› · call in col 221

(printed under page 115) (9) Nec ipse apostolicus Hermogenes. Fuit e comitibus Pauli Hermogenes Septimiano cognominis, postea desertor Pauli, atque inde Christi. Ideoque Septimius Hermogeni haeretico apostolici Hermogenis nomen incutit ut apostatam significet, quia nec ipse in fidei regula perseveravit, sicuti nec ille Paulinus in fide. Rig.

Nor was the apostolic Hermogenes himself. There was among Paul's companions a Hermogenes of the same name as Septimius's [Hermogenes], afterwards a deserter of Paul, and hence of Christ. And so Septimius strikes the heretic Hermogenes with the name of the apostolic Hermogenes to mark him as an apostate, because he too did not persevere in the rule of faith, just as that Pauline one did not persevere in the faith. Rigault.

(printed under page 115)

(10) ‹anchor: Neque ex nihilo› · call not visible

(printed under page 115) (10) Neque ex nihilo, etc. Gentilium sapientia, summa fatuitas est; e Stoicorum enim schola hauserat Hermogenes materiam aeternam fuisse, Deumque proinde cuncta non fecisse e nihilo. Quod non miraberis in gentili philosopho, nam ut infra habetur haereticorum patriarchae philosophi, ubi loquitur de iis qui ethnicorum placitis mordicus adhaerent. Le Pr.

Nor out of nothing, etc. The wisdom of the Gentiles is the height of folly; for Hermogenes had drawn from the school of the Stoics that matter was eternal, and that God accordingly did not make all things out of nothing. You will not wonder at this in a Gentile philosopher; for, as is said below, the philosophers are the patriarchs of the heretics, where he speaks of those who cling tooth and nail to the tenets of the heathen. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 115)

Editors' prose

The last four lines of the editors' Argumentum (begun on page 114, cols 219–220) stand across the full page width at the head of page 115, above CAPUT PRIMUM, spanning cols 221–222. They are set, with their English, at the head of parts/c221_a.md ("invalido, et minus idoneo" … "LUMP."). Q2 checked the left half of these lines against the column image; the right half is beyond the image edge and was not seen.

Page

running head: 221 LIBER ADV. HERMO[cut off at image edge]
marginal letters: A Solemus haereticis compendii gratia; B siquidem et nubentium contagio; C (1) Loquacitatem facundiam existimet (in the Commentarius); D hanc rem Dei legem adhibebat (in the Commentarius)
old-edition numerals: 198 after singulis,
running head: 221 LIBER ADV. HERMOGENEM 222
marginal letters: A ‹CAPUT PRIMUM›; B ‹siquidem et nubentium contagio›; C ‹(1) Loquacitatem facundiam existimet› (commentary); D ‹hanc rem Dei legem adhibebat› (commentary)
old-edition numerals: 198 after ‹singulis,›

PL 2:222

neque nata, nequae facta, nec initium habens omnino nec finem, ex qua Dominus omnia postea fecerit.

neither born nor made, nor having any beginning at all nor end, out of which the Lord afterwards made all things.

CAPUT II.

CHAPTER II.

Hanc primam umbram plane sine lumine pessimus pictor illis argumentationibus coloravit, praestruens aut Dominum de semetipso fecisse cuncta, aut de nihilo aut de aliquo: ut cum ostenderit neque ex semetipso fecisse potuisse, neque ex nihilo, quod superest exinde confirmet, ex aliquo eum fecisse, atque ita aliquid illud materiam fuisse. Negat illum ex semetipso facere potuisse: quia partes ipsius fuissent, quaecunque ex semetipso fecisset Dominus. Porro in partes non devenire, ut indivisibilem et indemutabilem, et eumdem semper qua Dominus. Caeterum, si de semetipso fecisset aliquid, ipsius fuisset aliquid. Omne autem et quod fieret, et quod faceret, imperfectum habendum; quia ex parte fieret, et ex parte faceret: aut si totus totum fecisset, oportuisset illum simul et totum esse, et non totum; quia oporteret et totum esse, ut faceret semetipsum; et totum non esse, ut fieret de semetipso. Porro difficillimum. Si enim esset, non fieret, esset enim: si vero non esset, non faceret, quia nihil esset. Eum autem qui semper

This first shadow, plainly without light, the worst of painters has coloured with these arguments, laying down beforehand that the Lord made all things either from Himself, or from nothing, or from something: so that, when he has shown that He could have made them neither from Himself nor from nothing, he may thereupon confirm what remains, that He made them from something, and so that that something was matter. He denies that He could have made from Himself, because whatever the Lord had made from Himself would have been parts of Himself. But He does not come into parts, being indivisible and unchangeable, and always the same inasmuch as [He is] Lord. Besides, if He had made anything from Himself, it would have been something of Himself. But everything, both what was being made and what was making, would have to be held imperfect, because it would be made in part and would make in part: or if He had made [Himself] whole as a whole, He would have had to be at once both whole and not whole; because He would have had to be whole, in order to make Himself, and not to be whole, in order to be made from Himself. Moreover, [this is] most difficult. For if He were, He would not be made, for He would already be; but if He were not, He would not make, because He would be nothing. But Him who always

Editors' notes and page, col. 222

Footnotes

(none: page 115's Variae lectiones and Commentarius are set in n221.md. Q3: of those, the calls ⁴ (aut ⁴ Dominum), (10) (ex nihilo (10)) and ⁵ (Porro ⁵ difficillimum) stand in col 222; n221 gives ⁴ and (10) as "call not visible".)

Page

running head: [...]R ADV. HERMOGENEM 222 (left part of head cut off at image edge)
marginal letters: A neque nata, nequae facta; B per qua Dominus. Caeterum; C bat cauterio (in the Commentarius, not in the text); D nis nomen incutit (in the Commentarius, not in the text)
old-edition numerals: 199 after oportuisset
running head: 221 LIBER ADV. HERMOGENEM 222
marginal letters: A ‹neque nata, nequae facta›; B ‹per qua Dominus›; C ‹bat cauterio. Quod genus picturae› (commentary); D ‹nis nomen incutit› (commentary)
old-edition numerals: 199 after ‹oportuisset›
misprints kept as printed: nequae (for neque) in "neque nata, nequae facta"

PL 2:223

sit, non fieri, sed esse illum in aevum aevorum. Igitur non de semetipso fecisse illum qui non ejus fuerit conditionis, ut de semetipso facere potuisset. Proinde ex nihilo non potuisse eum facere, sic contendit, bonum et optimum definiens Dominum, qui bona atque optima tam velit facere quam sit; imo nihil non bonum atque optimum et velle eum et facere. Igitur omnia bona, omnia ab eo bona et optima oportuisse fieri secundum conditionem ipsius. Inveniri autem et mala ab eo facta; utique non ex arbitrio, nec ex voluntate: quia si ex arbitrio et voluntate, nihil incongruens et indignum sibi faceret. Quod ergo non arbitrio suo fecerit, intelligi oportere ex vitio alicujus rei factum, ex materia esse sine dubio.

is, not becoming but being, into the age of ages. Therefore He did not make [things] out of Himself, since He was not of such a condition that He could have made [them] out of Himself. Likewise, so he contends, He could not have made [them] out of nothing, for he defines the Lord as good and most excellent, Who would wish to make things as good and most excellent as He Himself is; indeed, that there is nothing not good and most excellent that He both wills and makes. Therefore all things ought to have been made good, all things good and most excellent by Him, according to His own condition. But evil things also are found to have been made by Him; certainly not by choice, nor by will: because if by choice and will, He would make nothing unbefitting and unworthy of Himself. What therefore He did not make by His own choice must be understood to have been made from the fault of some thing, without doubt from matter.

CAPUT III.

Chapter III.

Adjicit et aliud: Deum semper Deum etiam Dominum fuisse, nunquam non Deum. Nullo porro modo potuisse illum semper Dominum haberi, sicut et semper Deum, si non fuisset aliquid retro semper, cujus semper Dominus haberetur, fuisse itaque materiam semper Deo Domino. Hanc conjecturam ejus jam hinc destruere properabo, quam hactenus propter non intelligentes adjecisse duxi, ut sciant, caetera quoque argumenta tam intelligi quam revinci. Dei nomen dicimus semper fuisse apud semetipsum, et in semetipso, Dominum vero non semper: diversa enim utriusque conditio. Deus substantiae ipsius nomen, id est divinitatis; Dominus vero non substantiae, sed potestatis substantiam semper fuisse cum suo nomine, quod est Deus, postea Dominus, accedentis scilicet rei mentio. Nam ex quo esse coeperunt in quae postestas Domini ageret, ex illo per accessionem potestatis et factus et dictus est Dominus: quia et pater et judex semper, quia

He adds another [argument] as well: that God, always God, was also always Lord, never not God. Moreover, He could in no way have been held to be always Lord, as He was also always God, if there had not always been something beforehand of which He might always be held to be Lord; and so matter had always existed alongside God the Lord. This conjecture of his I shall hasten to demolish here and now; I have thought fit to add it at this point for the sake of those who do not understand, so that they may know that the other arguments too can be understood as readily as refuted. We say that the name of God has always been with Himself and in Himself, but [the name of] Lord not always: for the condition of each is different. God is the name of His very substance, that is, of the divinity; but Lord [is the name] not of substance but of power; the substance has always existed with its own name, which is God; afterwards [came] Lord, namely the mention of something added. For from the time when the things began to exist upon which the power of the Lord might act, from that [time], by the accession of power, He both became and was called Lord: because both father and judge always, because

Editors' notes and page, col. 223

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁶ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Fieret Seml. Oberth. prob. a Jun.

Fieret ("it would come to be"): Semler, Oberthür; approved by Junius.

⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Deum semper Deum et jam semper Dominum fuisse; nunquam non Dominum Jun.

"That God was always God and also always Lord; never not Lord": Junius.

⁸ ‹anchor: Deus› · call in col 223 Sed Deus Seml.

Sed Deus ("but God"): Semler.

⁹ ‹anchor: accedentis scilicet rei mentio› · call in col 223 Accidentis scil. rei mentione Jun. merito Lat.

"By mention, that is, of a thing befalling": Junius; merito ("deservedly"): the Latin [editions].

¹⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Et Seml. Oberth.

Et ("and"): Semler, Oberthür.

¹¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Deum Latin. alii.

Deum ("God"): the Latin [editions] and others.

¹² ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Antea Seml.

Antea ("before"): Semler.

¹³ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Argutari tibi videor Hermogenes, naviter. Scriptura an Jun.

"I seem to you, Hermogenes, to be quibbling, busily. Scripture, or…": Junius.

¹⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Dominus Seml.

Dominus ("Lord"): Semler.

¹⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Dominus et intellecturus erat Seml.

"Lord, and was going to understand": Semler.

¹⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Cognominaturus Seml. Oberth.

Cognominaturus ("about to surname"): Semler, Oberthür.

¹⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Praecepit Seml.

Praecepit ("he commanded"): Semler.

¹⁸ ‹anchor: quia› · call in col 224 Qua Venet.

Qua ("by which"): the Venice edition.

¹⁹ ‹anchor: retorquebo adversus illum› · call in col 224 Ex poenitentia illius retorquebo advers. ill. Seml. Oberth.

"From his repentance I shall turn back against him": Semler, Oberthür.

²⁰ ‹anchor: erat, nemini serviens› · call in col 224 Non habuit rem quod erat, nemini serviens Rhenan. Fran. Paris; non habuit auctorem, quod erat Wouw. Ven. non habuit rem quod erat, ideoque nemini serviens cod. Vat. non auctorem quod erat ideoque, nemini serviens Jun.

"It did not have the thing which it was, serving no one": Rhenanus, Franeker, Paris editions; "it did not have an author, which it was": Wouwer, Venice edition; "it did not have the thing which it was, and therefore serving no one": the Vatican codex; "not an author, which it was, and therefore serving no one": Junius.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 116)

(11) ‹anchor: Fuit autem tempus cum› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 116) (11) Fuit autem tempus cum, etc. Hoc in loco errorem cavendum omnes facile agnoscent, nimirum Arianismum. Notum quippe est eorum verbum ἦν ὅτε οὐκ ἦν, quae voces idem sonant omnino. Le Pr.

But there was a time when, etc. Everyone will readily recognize an error to be guarded against in this place, namely Arianism. For their saying is well known, "there was when he was not," words which sound exactly the same. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 116)

(12) ‹anchor: Et accepit Deus› · call not visible

(printed under page 116) (12) Et accepit Deus. Verum quidem est, quod adnotat Auctor, Dominum non vocari Deum, nisi ubi universa perfecit, ipsumque vel maxime hominem; sed etiam ante Scripturam hic citatam, statim initio II cap. Non enim pluerat Dominus Deus, et plantavit Dominus Deus paradisum; tum vero demum istud, Et accepit Dominus Deus hominem. Pam.

And God took. It is true indeed, as the author notes, that God is not called Lord until he has completed all things, and above all man himself; but [he is] also [so called] before the Scripture cited here, right at the start of chapter 2: For the Lord God had not caused it to rain, and the Lord God planted a paradise; and only then this: And the Lord God took the man. Pamelius.

(printed under page 116) (13) Quorum Hermogenes extrema linea est. Quam esse finem omni rei dicit hoc ipso opere. Ait insipientiam Hermogenis finem esse omnium insipientiarum, hoc est, suspremam, supra quam nulla. Rig. — Quorum Hermogenes extrema linea est. In spatiis olim in quibus cursus publice fiebat, initium et finis lineis notabantur. Hinc quidquid postremum est, extrema linea proverbialiter dici coepit. Ergo cum Tertullianus Hermogenem hic vocat, non intelligentium extremam lineam, imperitissimum accipe. Horatius epistolam ad Quintium sic claudit: Mors ultima linea rerum est. Simul tacite alludit ad artem Hermogenis penicillo lineas ducere soliti, nam pictor erat. Sic infra de materia loquens: « Si in loco, inquit, ergo intra locum; si intra locum, ergo determinatur a loco intra quem est; si determinatur, habet lineam extremam, quam quantum proprie pictor agnoscit finem esse omni rei, cujus linea extrema est, » etc. In lib. adv. Praxeam, vocat Deum extremam lineam universitatis. Rhen.

Of whom Hermogenes is the furthest line. [The line] which he says in this very work is the end of every thing. He says Hermogenes' folly is the end of all follies, that is, the uppermost [suspremam, as printed], above which there is none. Rigault. — Of whom Hermogenes is the furthest line. In the courses where races were once publicly run, the start and the finish were marked with lines. Hence whatever is last came proverbially to be called the "furthest line." So when Tertullian here calls Hermogenes the furthest line of those who do not understand, take it as "the most ignorant." Horace closes his letter to Quinctius thus: "Death is the last line of things." At the same time he tacitly alludes to the art of Hermogenes, who was used to drawing lines with the brush, for he was a painter. So below, speaking of matter: "If in a place," he says, "then within a place; if within a place, then it is bounded by the place within which it is; if it is bounded, it has a furthest line, which, properly as a painter knows, is the end of every thing whose furthest line it is," etc. In the book Against Praxeas he calls God the furthest line of the universe. Rhenanus.

(printed under page 116) (14) Epinoemata. Sic emendavimus ex libro Ursini. Rig.

Epinoemata ("notions"). So we have corrected it from Ursinus's copy. Rigault.

(printed under page 116)

Page

running head: 323 TERTULLIANI OPERUM PARS II. — S (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹per sit, non fieri›; B ‹CAPUT III.›; C ‹substantiae, sed potestatis substantiam›; D ‹(11) Fuit autem tempus cum (editors' commentary)›
old-edition numerals: 200 after ‹coeperunt›

PL 2:224

Deus semper. Nam nec pater potuit esse ante filium, nec judex ante delictum. Fuit autem tempus, cum et delictum et filius non fuit, quod judicem, et qui patrem Dominum faceret. Sic et Dominus non ante ea quorum Dominus existeret, sed Dominus tantum futurus quandoque, sicut Pater per Filium, sicut judex per delictum; ita et Dominus per ea, quae sibi servitura fecisset. Argumentari tibi videor, Hermogenes. Naviter Scriptura nobis patrocinatur, quae utrumque nomen ei distinxit, et suo tempore ostendit. Nam Deus quidem quod erat semper, statim nominat: In principio fecit Deus caelum et terram. Ac deinceps quamdiu faciebat quorum dominus futurus erat, Deus solummodo ponit: Et dixit Deus, et fecit Deus, et vidit Deus, et nusquam adhuc Dominus. At ubi universa perfecit, ipsumque vel maxime hominem, qui proprie Dominum intellecturus erat, Dominus etiam cognominatur. Tunc etiam Dominus nomen adjunxit: Et accepit Deus Dominus hominem quem finxit. Et praecipit Dominus Deus. Ac exinde Dominus qui retro Deus tantum, ex quo habuit cujus esset. Nam Deus sibi erat; rebus autem tunc Deus, cum et Dominus. Igitur in quantum putabit ideo materiam semper fuisse, quia Dominus semper esset, in tantum constabit nihil fuisse, quia constat Dominum non semper fuisse. Adjiciam et ego propter non intelligentes, quorum Hermogenes extrema linea est, et quidem epinoemata illius retorquebo adversus illum. Cum enim neget materiam natam aut factam, sic quoque invenio Domini nomen Deo non competisse in materiam; quia libera fuerit necesse est, quae originem non habendo, non habuit auctorem, quod erat, nemini serviens. Itaque ex quo Deus potestatem

God always. For neither could He be Father before the Son, nor Judge before the offence. But there was a time when neither the offence nor the Son existed, [the one] which would make the Lord a Judge, and [the other] Who would make Him a Father. So too He was not Lord before those things of which He was to be Lord, but only Lord-to-be at some time, just as [He became] Father through the Son, as Judge through the offence; so also Lord through those things which He had made to serve Him. Do I seem to you to be arguing, Hermogenes? Vigorously does Scripture plead our cause, which has distinguished both names for Him, and shown each at its own time. For "God", which He always was, it names at once: In the beginning God made heaven and earth. And thereafter, as long as He was making the things of which He was to be Lord, it sets down "God" only: And God said, and God made, and God saw, and nowhere yet "Lord". But when He had completed all things, and above all man himself, who was properly to understand [Him as] Lord, He is also given the name Lord. Then too it added the name Lord: And the Lord God took the man whom He had formed. And the Lord God commands. And from then on He is Lord Who before was God only, from the time when He had that to which He might belong. For to Himself He was God; but to things He was God only then when He was also Lord. Therefore, in so far as he will suppose that matter always existed because the Lord always existed, so far will it be established that nothing existed, because it is established that the Lord did not always exist. I too will add, for the sake of those who do not understand, of whom Hermogenes is the extreme line, and indeed I shall turn his own notions back against him. For since he denies that matter was born or made, so also I find that the name of Lord did not befit God in respect of matter; because it must have been free, since, by not having an origin, it did not have an author of what it was, serving no one. Therefore from the time when the power of God

Editors' notes and page, col. 224

Footnotes

(13) ‹anchor: Hermogenes extrema linea est› · call in col 224

(printed under page 116)

(14) ‹anchor: epinoemata› · call in col 224

(printed under page 116)

Page

running head: [cut off] PARS II. — SERIES I, POLEMICA. 324
marginal letters: A ‹Deus semper. Nam nec pater›; B ‹et vidit Deus, et nusquam›; C ‹mata (14) illius retorquebo›; D ‹lineis notabantur. Hinc quidquid (commentary)›
old-edition numerals: 201 after ‹auctorem,›
other: running head prints column number 324, set as 224 per the request (UNSURE which is right); worn type gives existerct, fccisset, invcnio, set as existeret, fecisset, invenio; a handwritten underline and mark at "filius non fuit" ignored; last word po- hyphenated across the column break; full-width headings "Variae lectiones." and "Commentarius." cut off at the image edge, not set; variant readings at the page foot not set; editors' commentary (Rhenanus on extrema linea, Rigaltius on epinoemata) in the lower column not set
other: ligature doubt raised by the check (text not changed): caelum | coelum (page appears to print cœlum; text not changed)

PL 2:225

suam exercuit in eam, faciendo ex materia, ex illo materiam Dominum Deum passa, demonstrat hoc illum tamdiu non fuisse, quamdiu fuit. Hinc denique incipiam de materia retractare, quod eam Deus sibi comparet proinde non natam, proinde non factam, proinde aeternam, sine initio, sine fine propositam. Quis enim alius Dei census, quam aeternitas? quis alius aeternitatis status, quam semper fuisse et futurum esse, ex praerogativa nullius initii et nullius finis? Hoc si Dei est proprium, quia etsi alii adscribatur, jam non erit Dei proprium, sed commune cum eo cui et adscribitur. Nam, etsi sunt qui dicuntur dei sive in coelo, sive in terra nomine; caeterum unus Deus Pater, ex quo omnia (I Cor. VIII, 5): quo magis apud nos solius Dei esse debeat, quod Dei proprium est: et, ut dixi, jam non proprium esset, quia alterius esset. Quod si Deus est, unicum sit necesse est, ut unius sit: aut quid erit unicum et singulare, nisi cui nihil adaequabitur? quid principale, nisi quod super omnia, nisi quod ante omnia, et ex quo omnia? Haec Deus solus habendo est, et solus habendo unus est. Si alius habuerit, tot jam erunt Dei, quot habuerint quae Dei sunt. Ita Hermogenes duos deos infert. Materiam parem Deo infert. Deum autem unum esse oportet, quia quod summum sit, Deus est: summum autem non erit, nisi quod unicum fuerit: unicum autem esse non poterit, cui aliquid adaequabitur; adaequabitur autem Deo materia, cum aeterna censetur.

was exercised by Him as His own over it, by making [things] out of matter, matter, having experienced the Lord God from that [time], demonstrates that He was not this for as long as it existed. Hence, then, let me begin to deal with matter, on the ground that God sets it beside Himself as likewise not born, likewise not made, likewise eternal, put forward as without beginning, without end. For what other standing does God have than eternity? What other state does eternity have than always to have been and to be going to be, by the prerogative of no beginning and no end? If this is proper to God, because even if it is ascribed to another, it will no longer be proper to God, but shared with him to whom it is also ascribed. For although there are those who are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, in name; yet there is one God the Father, from Whom are all things (1 Cor. 8:5): so much the more ought that which is proper to God to belong, among us, to God alone: and, as I have said, it would no longer be proper, because it would be another's. But if He is God, He must necessarily be unique, so that it may belong to one: or what will be unique and singular, except that to which nothing will be made equal? What will be principal, except what is above all things, except what is before all things, and from which are all things? By having these things God alone is, and by having them alone He is one. If another has had them, there will now be as many gods as have had the things that are God's. Thus Hermogenes brings in two gods. He brings in matter as equal to God. But God must be one, because whatever is supreme is God: but it will not be supreme unless it is unique: but it will not be able to be unique if anything is made equal to it; and matter is made equal to God when it is reckoned eternal.

CAPUT V.

Chapter V.

Sed Deus, Deus est; materia, materia est: quasi diversitas nominum comparationi resistat, si status idem vindicetur. Sit et natura diversa, sit et forma non eadem, dummodo ipsius status una sit ratio. Innatus Deus, an non et innata materia? semper Deus, an non semper et materia? Ambo sine initio, ambo sine fine, ambo etiam auctores universitatis, tam qui fecit, quam de qua fecit. Neque enim potest non et materia auctrix omnium deputari, de

But God is God; matter is matter: as though a difference of names could resist comparison, if the same state is claimed. Let the nature also be different, let the form also not be the same, provided that the principle of its state be one. Is God unborn, and is not matter also unborn? Is God always, and is not matter also always? Both without beginning, both without end, both also authors of the universe, as much He Who made as that from which He made. For matter too cannot fail to be reckoned the authoress of all things, of

Editors' notes and page, col. 225

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ²¹ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Haec Jun. fuit. Rigalt. Ven. rectius.

Haec ("these things"): Junius; fuit ("was"): Rigault, Venice edition, more correctly.

²² ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Proposita Jun. c. rel.

Proposita ("set forth"): Junius with the rest.

²³ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Sed quia si et alii Rhen. Seml. Oberth. quia si et alii Wouw. Rig.

"But because if others too": Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür; "because if others too": Wouwer, Rigault.

²⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Etenim, ut dixi, jam non proprium esset quia alterius esset quod, si Deus unus est, unicum sit necesse est, et unius sit Jun. quod si Deus, unicum cod. Wouwer.

"For, as I said, it would no longer be proper to him, because it would be another's; which, if God is one, must be unique and belong to one": Junius; "which if God, unique": the codex, Wouwer.

²⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Haec Deus solus habendo unus est. Seml. Oberth.

"God, by alone having these things, is one": Semler, Oberthür.

²⁶ ‹anchor: Materiam parem Deo infert› · call in col 225 Infert dum materiam Jun.

"He brings in, while [he brings in] matter": Junius.

²⁷ ‹anchor: cum aeterna censetur› · call in col 225 Quam aeterna censebitur Jun. conj. forte pro cum.

"Than [as] it will be reckoned eternal": Junius's conjecture, perhaps for cum ("when").

²⁸ ‹anchor: dummodo› · call in col 225 Dum nomini ipsius Seml.

"While to his name": Semler.

²⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Signum interrog. abest in ed. Rhen. Seml. et rectius.

The question mark is absent in the editions of Rhenanus and Semler, and more correctly.

³⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Rhen. conjiciebat salva sit ratio; alii (teste et comprobatore Jun.) salva sit deo et auctoritas et substantia, qua solus et primus auctor est, et Dominus omnium censetur.

Rhenanus conjectured "let the principle be safe"; others (on the witness and with the approval of Junius) "let both the authority and the substance be safe to God, by which he alone is first author and is reckoned Lord of all."

³¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Dii alii.

Dii ("gods"): others.

³² ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Materia Seml.

Materia ("matter"): Semler.

³³ ‹anchor: materiae quoque adscribit› · call in col 226 Comparandus, per quae nec est. Materiae quoque ascribit Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

"To be compared, through which [things] it is not either. He ascribes [them] to matter also": Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

³⁴ ‹anchor: Ego quidem Deus› · call in col 226 Ille quidem Deus apud eosd.

"He indeed [is] God": in the same [editors].

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 117)

(15) ‹anchor: Haec Deus solus habendo est› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 117) (15) Haec Deus solus habendo est. Horum Deus solus compos est; haec solus habet. Rig.

God is [God] by alone having these things. God alone is master of these; he alone has them. Rigault.

(printed under page 117) (16) Dicit salvum Deo esse, ut et solus sit, etc. Contrarium suo dogmati sensum et ἐναντιοφανὲς in Hermogene ostendit, qui Deum solum et primum esse affirmet; cum tamen materiam illi coaevam et coaeternam dicere non vereatur. Quod impium et e philosophiae ethnicae penu depromptum. Duo quippe rerum principia, Deum et materiam, Platonem admisisse, me docuit Laertius. Id autem in eo miror, licet in caeteris insolens mihi non videatur. Le Pr.

He says it is kept safe for God that he be both alone, etc. He shows in Hermogenes a meaning contrary to his own doctrine and self-contradictory: he affirms that God is alone and first, and yet does not fear to call matter coeval and coeternal with him. This is impious, and drawn from the storehouse of heathen philosophy. For Laertius has taught me that Plato admitted two first principles of things, God and matter. This surprises me in him, though in the others it does not seem unusual to me. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 117) (17) Dicet Deus: Ego primus. Ter istud habetur apud Isaiam, c. XLI, XLIV et XLVIII, in haec verba: Ego primus et novissimus. Illud autem: Extendi coelum solus, secundum LXX, reperitur Isaiae XLIV, ubi editio ex Hebraeo habet extendens, cui praemittitur, Ego Dominus complens aut faciens omnia. Ad quod etiam hic alludit Auctor, cum Deum omnium auctorem facit. Pam.

God will say: I am first. This occurs three times in Isaiah, chapters 41, 44 and 48, in these words: I am the first and the last. But the words I stretched out the heaven alone, according to the Septuagint, are found in Isaiah 44, where the version from the Hebrew has stretching out, preceded by I am the Lord, who fill or make all things. The author alludes to this too here, when he makes God the author of all things. Pamelius.

(printed under page 117) (18) Extendi, inquit, coelum solus. Sic apud Isaiam c. XLIV: Ἐξέτεινα τὸν οὐρανὸν μόνος. Et Psal. CIV: ὁ ἐκτείνων τὸν οὐρανὸν ὡσεὶ δέῤῥιν. Quae sunt etiam ab externis citata. Sic enim ad Critiam Triephon: Εἰ οὐρανὸν ὡς δέῤῥιν ἐξήπλωσε, γῆν δὲ ἐφ ὕδατοσ ἔπηξεν, ἀστέρας ἐμόρφωσεν.

I stretched out, he says, the heaven alone. So in Isaiah 44: "I stretched out the heaven alone." And Psalm 104: "who stretches out the heaven like a hide." These words have been cited by outsiders too. For so Triephon says to Critias: "If he spread out the heaven like a hide, fixed the earth upon the water, gave the stars their shapes."

(printed under page 117)

Page

running head: 225 LIBER·ADV. HER (cut off at the image edge; first word looks like LIBBR, probably worn E)
marginal letters: A testatem suam exercuit; B debeat, quod Dei proprium; C beside CAPUT V. (right of it); D beside commentary note (15) Haec Deus solus habendo est
old-edition numerals: 202 after initio,

PL 2:226

qua universitas consistit. Quomodo respondebit ? Non statim materiam comparari Deo, si quid Dei habeat, quia non totum habendo non concurrat in plenitudinem comparationis ? Quid Deo reliquit amplius, ut non totum Dei, materiae dedisse videatur ? Vel qua, inquit, et sic habente materia, salva sit Deo et auctoritas et substantia, qua solus et primus auctor est, et Dominus omnium censeatur. Veritas autem sic unum Deum exigit defendendo, ut solius sit quidquid ipsius est. Ita enim ipsius erit, si fuerit solius : et ex hoc alius deus non possit admitti, dum nemini licet habere de Deo aliquid. Ergo, inquis, nec nos habemus Dei aliquid. Imo habemus, et habebimus, sed ab ipso, non a nobis. Nam et dei erimus, si meruimus illi esse de quibus praedicavit : Ego dixi : Vos Dei estis ; et Stetit Deus in ecclesia deorum (Psal. LXXXI, 1) : sed ex gratia ipsius, non ex nostra proprietate, quia ipse est solus qui deos faciat. Materiae autem proprium facit quod cum Deo habet : aut si a Deo accepit, quod est Dei, ordinem dico aeternitatis, pote⟨s⟩t credi et habere illam cum Deo aliquid, et deum illam non esse. Quale est autem, cum confitetur ille aliquid cum Deo habere, et vult solius Dei esse quod materiam non negat habere ?

which the universe consists. How will he answer? That matter is not at once compared with God if it has something of God, because, by not having the whole, it does not come up to the fullness of comparison? What more has he left to God, that he should not seem to have given the whole of God to matter? Or, he says, even with matter so placed, both authority and substance remain safe to God, by which He alone and first is author and is reckoned Lord of all. But truth, in defending one God, so requires that whatever is His should be His alone. For thus it will be His, if it is His alone; and from this no other god can be admitted, since no one is permitted to have anything of God. Then, you say, neither do we have anything of God. On the contrary, we have, and shall have, but from Him, not from ourselves. For we shall even be gods, if we have deserved to be those of whom He proclaimed: I have said: You are gods; and God stood in the assembly of gods (Ps. 81:1); but by His grace, not from our own property, because He is the only one Who makes gods. But matter makes its own what it has with God; or, if it received from God that which is God's, I mean the rank of eternity, it can be believed both that it has something with God and that it is not god. But what sort of thing is it, when he confesses that it has something with God, and yet wishes that to be God's alone which he does not deny that matter has?

CAPUT VI.

Chapter VI.

Dicit salvum Deo esse ut et solus sit, et primus, et omnium auctor, et omnium Dominus, et nemini comparandus ; quae mox materiae quoque adscribit. Ego quidem Deus, contestabitur Deus, et juravit nonnumquam per semetipsum, quod alius non sit qualis ipse (Deut. XXXII, 39, 40) : sed mendacem eum faciet Hermogenes. Erit enim et materia qualis Deus, infecta, innata, initium non habens, nec finem. Dicet Deus : Ego primus (Isa. XLI, XLIV, XLVIII) ? et quomodo primus, cui materia coaetanea est ? inter coaetaneos autem et contemporales ordo non est, aut et materia prima est. Extendi, inquit, caelum solus (Isa. XLIV) : atquin non

He says that it remains safe to God that He is both alone, and first, and author of all, and Lord of all, and comparable to no one; which things he presently ascribes to matter also. I indeed am God, God will testify, and He has at times sworn by Himself that there is no other such as He (Deut. 32:39–40); but Hermogenes will make Him a liar. For matter too will be such as God: unmade, unborn, having no beginning, nor end. Will God say: I am first (Isa. 41; 44; 48)? And how first, to Whom matter is coeval? Among coevals and contemporaries, however, there is no order, or else matter too is first. I stretched out, He says, the heaven alone (Isa. 44); and yet not

Editors' notes and page, col. 226

Footnotes

(16) ‹anchor: ut et solus sit› · call in col 226

(printed under page 117)

(17) ‹anchor: Ego primus› · call in col 226

(printed under page 117)

(18) ‹anchor: coelum solus› · call in col 226

(printed under page 117)

Page

running head: [LI]BER ADV. HERMOGENEM. 226
marginal letters: A qua universitas consistit; B bus praedicavit : Ego dixi; C scribit. Ego quidem Deus; D Ego primus et novissimus (in the Commentarius at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: 203 after aut
other: "pote⟨s⟩t" has a damaged s; "Vos Dei estis" is printed with capital Dei and rendered "You are gods"; the calls (16), (17), (18) are commentary calls and are not set; the Variae lectiones and the Commentarius at the page foot are editors' notes and are not set; the cut-off left column belongs to col. 225

PL 2:227

solus, cum ea enim extendit. Cum proponit salvo Dei statu fuisse materiam; vide ne ei reddatur a nobis, proinde salvo statu materiae fuisse Deum, communi tamen statu amborum. Salvum ergo erit et materiae, ut et ipsa fuerit, sed cum Deo, quia et Deus solus, sed cum illa. Et ipsa prima cum Deo, quia et Deus primus cum illa: sed et illa incomparabilis cum Deo, quia et Deus incomparabilis cum illa, et auctrix cum Deo, et domina cum Deo. Sic aliquid et non totum materiae habere, ita illi nihil reliquit Hermogenes, quod non et materiae contulisset: ut non materia Deo, sed Deus potius materiae compararetur. Atque adeo, cum ea quae propria Dei vindicamus, semper fuisse, sine initio, sine fine, et primum fuisse, et solum, et omnium auctorem, materiae quoque competant; quaero quid diversum et alienum a Deo, ac per hoc privatum materia possederit, per quod Deo non comparetur? In qua omnia Dei propria recensentur, satis praejudicant de reliqua comparatione.

alone, for He stretched [it] out with it. When he proposes that matter existed with God's condition kept intact, see that it is not answered back to him by us that likewise God existed with the condition of matter kept intact, yet with a condition common to both. It will therefore be kept intact for matter as well, that it too existed, but with God, since God too [was] alone, but with it. And it [is] first with God, since God too [is] first with it; but it too [is] incomparable with God, since God too [is] incomparable with it, and author with God, and mistress with God. Thus, to have something, and not the whole, of matter: so has Hermogenes left Him nothing which he had not also conferred on matter, so that it is not matter that is compared to God, but rather God to matter. And so, since those things which we claim as proper to God, to have always existed, without beginning, without end, and to have been first, and alone, and the author of all things, belong to matter also, I ask what matter possessed that was different and foreign to God, and thereby peculiar to itself, by which it should not be compared to God. Since in it all the properties of God are reckoned up, they sufficiently settle in advance the rest of the comparison.

CAPUT VII.

Chapter VII.

Si minorem et inferiorem materiam Deo, et idcirco incomparabilem illi, contendit, ut majori, ut superiori, praescribo non capere ullam diminutionem et humiliationem, quod sit aeternum et innatum: quia hoc et Deum faciat tantum, quantus est, nullo minorem, neque subjectiorem, imo omnibus majorem et sublimiorem. Sicut enim caetera quae nascuntur, aut finiunt, et idcirco aeterna non sunt, semel opposita fini, quae et initio admittunt ea quae Deus non capit, diminutionem dico interim et subjectionem, quia nata et facta sunt: ita et Deus ideo ea non capit, quia nec natus omnino, nec factus est. Materiae autem status talis est. Igitur et duobus aeternis, ut innatis, ut infectis, Deo atque materia, ob eamdem rationem communis status, ex aequo habentibus id quod neque diminui, nec subjici admittit, id est aeternitatem: neutrum dicimus altero esse minorem, sive majorem, neutrum altero humiliorem, sive superiorem, sed stare ambo ex pari magna, ex pari sublimia, ex pari solidae et perfectae felicitatis, quae censetur aeternitas. Neque enim proximi erimus opinionibus nationum,

If he contends that matter is lesser than and inferior to God, and therefore incomparable to Him, as to one greater, as to one superior, I lay down that what is eternal and unborn admits no diminution and humbling, because it is this that makes God too as great as He is, less than none, nor more subject, nay, greater and loftier than all. For just as the other things which are born, or come to an end, and therefore are not eternal, being once exposed to an end, and which also by their beginning admit those things which God does not admit, I mean for the moment diminution and subjection, because they were born and made: so God too does not admit them for this reason, that He was neither born at all nor made. And such is the condition of matter. Therefore, since the two eternal ones, as unborn, as unmade, God and matter, by the same reason of a common condition, have equally that which admits of neither being diminished nor being made subject, that is, eternity, we say that neither is lesser than the other, or greater, neither humbler than the other, or superior, but that both stand equally great, equally lofty, equally of solid and perfect felicity, which is reckoned to be eternity. For neither shall we come close to the opinions of the nations,

Editors' notes and page, col. 227

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ³⁵ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Salvo statu materiae fuisse Deus Rhen. Seml.; salvo statu materiae fuisse Deum habet cod. Wouw. approbante Jun.

"God was, the status of matter being kept safe": Rhenanus, Semler; "that God was, the status of matter being kept safe" is the reading of the codex, Wouwer, with Junius approving.

³⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Vide ne irrideatur a nobis Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

"See that it is not mocked by us": Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

³⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Cum ea propria Dei apud eosd.

"Since those things [are] proper to God": in the same [editors].

³⁸ ‹anchor: Materiae autem› · call in col 227 Et materiae autem Rhen. etc.

"And of matter, however": Rhenanus etc.

³⁹ ‹anchor: Deo atque materia› · call in col 227 Deo atque materiae Rhen. et iidem al., ut solet.

"To God and to matter": Rhenanus and the same others, as usual.

⁴⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Forte Deo Jun.

Perhaps Deo ("to God"): Junius.

⁴¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Et ille materia Jun.

"And he [by] matter": Junius.

⁴² ‹anchor: egenti se Deo praestitit› · call in col 228 Sed eguisse se Deo pr. Lat. sed egenti se Deo pr. Jun. Sed egenti se Deo p. divitem et locupletem et liberalem cod. Wouw. forte sed egeno se d. p. divite (scil. se).

"But that it had needed, it showed itself to God": the Latin [editions]; "but it showed itself to God in need": Junius; "but it showed itself to God in need rich and wealthy and liberal": the codex, Wouwer; perhaps "but it showed itself to a needy God, [itself] being rich" (namely, itself).

⁴³ ‹anchor: puto et Christo› · call in col 228 Puto et Christo. Fran. Paris. Rig. At Jun. prophetas, apostolos, Christum.

"I think, and to Christ": Franeker, Paris editions, Rigault. But Junius: "prophets, apostles, Christ."

⁴⁴ ‹anchor: Dominus› · call in col 228 Deus Seml. Oberth.

Deus ("God"): Semler, Oberthür.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 118) (19) De cujus utitur. Defectiva locutio: subauditur rebus, aut aliquid simile. Hujusmodi formula sermonis etiam in superioribus libris usus est. Adversus Marcionem, lib. V: Si in creatoris, inquit, accipitur. Eodem libro: Et a nostrae, inquit, partis possit opponi. Rursum mox sequitur, non minor est eo de cujus utitur. Graecorum est imitatio Rhen.

Of whose he makes use. An elliptical expression: things, or something similar, is understood. He used this kind of phrasing in earlier books too. Against Marcion, book 5: If it is taken in the Creator's, he says. In the same book: And it could be objected from our side's, he says. And again just after this follows he is not less than him of whose he makes use. It is an imitation of the Greeks. Rhenanus.

(printed under page 118) (20) Haereticorum patriarchae philosophi. Ex professo istud tractatum habetur, supra ab auctore lib. de Praescript. adv. haer. cap. 7. Pam. — Haereticorum pratriachae. In epistola ad Ctesiphontem hunc Tertulliani locum citat divus Hieronymus. Idem in Nahum prophetam exponens illud, exsilivit quasi attelabus: « Omnia enim, inquit, dogmata eorum (loquitur de haereticis) cum frigeant, et volare non possint, sedem sibi et requiem inter Aristotelis et Chrysippi spineta reperiunt. » Rhen.

The philosophers, patriarchs of the heretics. This is treated expressly above by the author, in the book On the Prescription against Heretics, chapter 7. Pamelius. — Patriarchs [printed pratriachae] of the heretics. Saint Jerome cites this passage of Tertullian in his letter to Ctesiphon. The same, expounding in the prophet Nahum the words it leapt out like a locust, says: "For all their doctrines (he is speaking of the heretics), since they grow cold and cannot fly, find themselves a seat and resting place among the thornbrakes of Aristotle and Chrysippus." Rhenanus.

(printed under page 118)

Page

running head: 227 TERTULLIANI OPERUM PARS II. — (type worn: reads TBRTULLIANI OPBRUM PARS H.; cut off at right edge)
marginal letters: A solus, cum ea enim extendit; B diversum et alienum a Deo; C Deus non capit, diminutionem dico; D (19) De cujus utitur (commentary)
old-edition numerals: 204 after sublimia,
other: "ut et ipsa": the "et" is printed with damaged type (looks like εt), set as et; "Sic aliquid et non totum materiae habere" set as printed, sense UNSURE; full-width heading "Variae lectiones" and the variant notes 35-44 at page foot not set; full-width heading "Commentarius" and editors' commentary notes (19)-(20) not set

PL 2:228

quae si quando coguntur Deum confiteri, tamen et alios infra illum volunt. Divinitas autem gradum non habet, utpote unica; quae si et in materia erit ut proinde innata et infecta et aeterna, aderit utrobique, quia minor se nusquam poterit esse. Quomodo ergo discernere audebit Hermogenes, atque ita subjicere Deo materiam, aeternam aeterno, innatam innato, auctricem auctori? dicere audentem, et, Ego prima, et, Ego ante omnia, et, Ego a quo omnia: pares fuimus, simul fuimus, ambo sine initio, sine fine: ambo sine auctore, sine Deo? Quis me Deus subjicit contemporali, coaetaneo? Si quia Deus dicitur, habeo et ego meum nomen. Aut ego sum Deus, aut ille materia: quia ambo sumus quod alter est nostrum. Putas itaque materiam Deo non comparasse, quam scilicet subjiciat illi?

who, if ever they are compelled to confess God, nevertheless want others too below Him. But divinity has no degree, being unique; and if it is also in matter, so that matter is likewise unborn and unmade and eternal, it will be present in both, since it can nowhere be less than itself. How then will Hermogenes dare to make a distinction, and so to subject matter to God, the eternal to the eternal, the unborn to the unborn, the author to the author? Matter dares to say both "I am first" and "I am before all things" and "I am the one from whom all things come": we have been equals, we have been together, both without beginning, without end; both without author, without God. What God subjects me to one contemporary and coeval with me? If it is because He is called God, I too have my own name. Either I am God, or He is matter, since we are both what the other of us is. Do you suppose, then, that he has not made matter equal to God, inasmuch, forsooth, as he subjects it to Him?

CAPUT VIII.

Chapter VIII.

Atquin etiam praeponit illam Deo, et Deum potius subjicit materiae, cum vult eum de materia cuncta fecisse. Si enim ex illa usus est ad opera mundi, jam et materia superior invenitur, quae illi copiam operandi subministravit, et Deus subjectus materiae videtur, cujus substantiae eguit. Nemo enin non eget eo de cujus utitur: nemo non subjicitur ei cujus eget, ut possit uti: sic et nemo de alieno utendo non minor est eo de cujus utitur. Et nemo qui praestat de suo uti, non in hoc superior est eo cui praestat uti. Itaque materia ipsa quidem Deo non eguit, sed egenti se Deo praestitit, divitem et locupletem et liberalem minori, opinor, et invalido et minus idoneo de nihilo facere quae velit. Grande revera beneficium Deo contulit, ut haberet hodie per quem Deus cognosceretur, et omnipotens vocaretur: nisi quod jam non omnipotens, si non et hoc potens, ex nihilo omnia proferre. Sane et sibi praestitit aliquid materia, ut et ipsa cum Deo possit, agnosci coaequalis Deo, imo et adjutrix: nisi quod solus eam Hermogenes cognovit, et haereticorum patriarchae philosophi. Prophetis enim et apostolis usque adhuc latuit, puto et Christo.

And yet he even sets it above God, and rather subjects God to matter, since he holds that He made all things out of matter. For if He made use of it for the works of the world, then matter too is found to be superior, since it supplied Him with the means of working, and God appears subject to matter, whose substance He needed. For nobody fails to need the one whose [property] he makes use of; nobody is not subject to that which he needs in order to be able to use it; so also nobody, in using what belongs to another, is not less than the one whose [property] he makes use of. And nobody who grants the use of what is his own is not in this respect superior to the one to whom he grants the use. So matter itself, indeed, did not need God, but offered itself to God in His need, rich and wealthy and generous towards one who was lesser, I suppose, and weak and less able to make out of nothing what He wished. A great benefit indeed it conferred on God, that He should have today something through which God might be known and might be called almighty: except that He is now not almighty, if He is not also able to do this, to bring forth all things out of nothing. Certainly matter also secured something for itself, that it too might have power together with God, might be recognized as coequal with God, nay even as His helper: except that Hermogenes alone has known it, and the philosophers, the patriarchs of the heretics. For until now it has lain hidden from the prophets and apostles, and, I think, from Christ.

CAPUT IX.

Chapter IX.

Non potest dicere Deum ut Dominum materia usum ad opera mundi: Dominus enim non potuit

He cannot say that God made use of matter as its Lord for the works of the world: for the Lord could not

Editors' notes and page, col. 228

Footnotes

(19) ‹anchor: eo de cujus utitur› · call in col 228

(printed under page 118)

(20) ‹anchor: haereticorum patriarchae philosophi› · call in col 228

(printed under page 118)

Page

running head: [cut off at left]UM PARS II. — SERIES I, POLEMICA 228
marginal letters: A ‹quae si quando coguntur›; B ‹CAPUT VIII.›; C ‹et minus idoneo de nihilo›; D ‹de Praescript. adv. haer. (in Commentarius, not set)›
old-edition numerals: 205 after ‹Christo› (before CAPUT IX.)

PL 2:229

esse substantiae coaequalis. Sed precario forsitan usus est. Et ideo precario, non dominio, ut cum ea mala esset de mala tamen sustinuerit uti scilicet ex necessitate mediocritatis suae, qua non valebat ex nihilo uti; non ex potestate, quâm si habuisset omnino ut Deus in materiam, quam malam norat, ante eam in bonum convertisset ut Dominus et bonus, ut ita de bono, non de malo uteretur. Sed quia bonus quidem, Dominus autem non, ideo, qualem habuit, alti usus, necessitatem suam ostendit cedentem conditioni materiae: quam si Dominiuus fuisset, emendasset. Sic enim Hermogeni respondendum est, cum ex dominio defendit Deum materia usum, et de re non sua, scilicet non facta ab ipso. Jam ergo malum ab ipso, qui est mali, si non auctor, quia non effector, certe permissor, quia dominator. Si vero materia non et ipsius, qua malum Dei non est: de alieno ergo usus est, qua egens ejus; aut et injuria, qua praevalens ejus. His enim tribus modis aliena sumuntur, jure, beneficio, impetu; id est, dominio, precario, vi. Dominio non suppetente eligat Hermogenes, quid Deo congruat, precario an vi de materia cuncta fecisse. Non ergo melius censuisset Deus nihil omnino faciendum, quam precario aut vi faciendum, et quidem de malo?

be of equal substance. But perhaps He used it by entreaty. And therefore by entreaty, not by ownership, so that, although it was evil, He nevertheless endured to use what was evil, namely out of the necessity of His own mediocrity, by which He was unable to use nothing; not from power, for if He had had power over matter entirely as God, He would first have converted the matter which He knew to be evil into good, as Lord and as good, so that He might thus use what was good, not what was evil. But because He was indeed good, but not Lord, therefore, using such as He had, He showed His necessity yielding to the condition of matter: which, had He been Lord, He would have amended. For thus must Hermogenes be answered, when he defends God as having used matter by right of ownership, and that a thing not His own, namely not made by Him. Already therefore evil is from Him, Who is, if not the author of evil, because not its maker, at least its permitter, because its ruler. But if the matter is not even His, inasmuch as evil is not God's, then He used what belonged to another, as being in need of it; or else by wrong, as prevailing over it. For in these three ways are the things of others taken: by right, by favour, by assault; that is, by ownership, by entreaty, by force. Since ownership is not available, let Hermogenes choose which befits God: to have made all things out of matter by entreaty or by force. Would not God then have judged it better that nothing at all should be made, than that it should be made by entreaty or by force, and that out of evil?

CAPUT X.

Chapter X.

Nonne, etiamsi materia optima fuisset, aeque indecorum sibi existimasset, de alieno, licet bono? Fatue satis, si ita gloriae suae causa molitus est mundum, ut debitorem se alienae substantiae ostenderet, et quidem non bonae. Ergo, inquit, ex nihilo faceret, ut mala quoque arbitrio ejus imputarentur? Magna, bona fide, caecitas haereticorum pro hujusmodi argumentatione, cum ideo aut alium Deum bonum et optimum volunt credi, quia mali auctorem existiment Creatorem; aut

Would He not, even if the matter had been excellent, have judged it equally unbecoming to Himself [to make] out of what belonged to another, albeit good? Foolishly enough, if He so contrived the world for the sake of His glory as to show Himself a debtor to another's substance, and that not a good one. "Then," he says, "should He have made out of nothing, so that evil things too might be imputed to His will?" Great, in good faith, is the blindness of the heretics in arguing of this kind, since they either wish another God to be believed good and most good for this reason, that they consider the Creator the author of evil; or

Editors' notes and page, col. 229

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁴⁵ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Non esset Seml. Oberth. Non abest Fran. Paris. Rig. rectius.

"Would not be": Semler, Oberthür. Non ("not") is absent in the Franeker and Paris editions and Rigault, more correctly.

⁴⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible In bono Seml. Oberth.

"In good": Semler, Oberthür.

⁴⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Qua malum, Dei non est Seml. Oberth.

"In so far as [it is] evil, it is not God's": Semler, Oberthür.

⁴⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Disjungit Rhen. nec: approb. Seml.

Rhenanus separates nec ("nor"); Semler approves.

⁴⁹ ‹anchor: de materia cuncta fecisse› · call in col 229 Fecisset Fran.

Fecisset ("would have made"): the Franeker edition.

⁵⁰ ‹anchor: si ita› · call in col 229 Fatue satis. Itaque Rhen. Seml. Oberth.; fatue satis itaque Jun.

"Foolishly enough. And so": Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür; "foolishly enough, and so": Junius.

⁵¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Assectator conjicit Jun.

Assectator ("follower"): Junius's conjecture.

⁵² ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Auctor ejus: haec vv. ab aliis omissa, addita sunt in Venet. et mss. Wouw.

Auctor ejus ("its author"): these words, omitted by the others, are added in the Venice edition and in the manuscripts, Wouwer.

⁵³ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Qui solus hab. Rhen, et post eum Seml. Oberth.

Qui solus ("who alone"): the reading of Rhenanus, and after him Semler, Oberthür.

⁵⁴ ‹anchor: pronuntiavit› · call in col 230 (numeral faint in the scan; the note's lemma matches) Pronuntiavit omnes. Junius evidentius esse dicit: praenuntiavit.

Pronuntiavit ("he declared"): all. Junius says praenuntiavit ("he declared beforehand") is clearer.

⁵⁵ ‹anchor: assertor ejus inventus est› · call in col 230 Comma pingitur in Seml.

A comma is printed in Semler.

⁵⁶ ‹anchor: cum materiae malo conversatur› · call in col 230 Conversatus Seml.

Conversatus ("having associated"): Semler.

⁵⁷ ‹anchor: unde nobis› · call in col 230 Unde nobis? omnes rectius quam Seml. qui habet: non de nobis.

"Whence [does he persuade] us?": all, more correctly than Semler, who has "not from us."

⁵⁸ ‹anchor: definimus diminutionem› · call in col 230 Definiimus deminutionem Jun.

"We have defined diminution": Junius.

⁵⁹ ‹anchor: quod sit aeternum› · call in col 230 Posse, quod sit aeternum omnes praeter Seml. et Oberth. qui legunt: quod si ita erit.

"Can, that which is eternal": all except Semler and Oberthür, who read "which if it shall be so."

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 119)

(21) ‹anchor: Et ideo precario, non dominio› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 119) (21) Et ideo precario, non dominio. Precario, dominio, vi, sumere aliena, verba sunt jurisconsultis. Legum autem civilium peritiam in Tertulliano permagnam fuisse, non hic tantum locus ostendit. Rhen.

And therefore by sufferance, not by ownership. To take another's property "by sufferance," "by ownership," "by force" are terms of the jurists. That Tertullian's knowledge of the civil laws was very great, this is not the only passage to show. Rhenanus.

(printed under page 119)

(22) ‹anchor: Precario an vi› · call not visible

(printed under page 119) (22) Precario an vi. Precario aliquid fieri dicitur, cum precibus extorquetur, interdum enim flagitationi et importunae assiduitati conceditur, quod alias negaretur. Le Pr.

By sufferance or by force. Something is said to be done "by sufferance" when it is wrung out by entreaty; for sometimes what would otherwise be refused is granted to pressing demand and importunate persistence. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 119)

(23) ‹anchor: bona fide› · call in col 229

(printed under page 119) (23) Bona fide. Id est, serio: sic Petronius in Satyr.: « Sed nihil jam queror, nihil jam memini si bona fide poenitentiam emendas. » Et alio loco antea nimirum: « Oculisque bona fide exactis. » Aliquando idem est ac juste et cum aequitate, et in hunc sensum optima fide, dicitur etiam: idem Petr.: « Non repugnavit ille, sed postquam optima fide partiti manubias sumus. » Le Pr.

In good faith. That is, in earnest: so Petronius in the Satyricon: "But I complain of nothing now, I remember nothing now, if in good faith you make amends by repentance." And in another place, earlier indeed: "And with eyes put out in good earnest." Sometimes it is the same as justly and with fairness, and in this sense in the best faith is also said: the same Petronius: "He did not resist, but after we had divided the spoils in the best faith." Le Prieur.

(printed under page 119)

(24) ‹anchor: Sua injectione› · call not visible

(printed under page 119) (24) Sua injectione. Objectione seu argumento in contrarium contorto. Le Pr.

By his own throwing-in. By an objection, or an argument turned back against him. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 119)

(25) ‹anchor: Sed assentator mali› · call not visible

(printed under page 119) (25) Sed assentator mali. Quasi assertor, seu mavis, dissimulator, Deus scilicet malam esse materiam cum agnoscat, ea tamen utitur (quod erat Hermogenis dogma) illiusque pravitatem vel astruit, vel saltem dissimulat. Le Pr.

But a flatterer of evil. As if a champion, or if you prefer, a dissembler: since God, that is, acknowledges that matter is evil, yet makes use of it (which was Hermogenes' doctrine), and either confirms its depravity or at least conceals it. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 119) (26) Malam esse materiam? Respondebat modo objectis ab Hermogene, tanquam si vera esse concederet: hic vero in eum insurgit, postulatque demonstret malam esse materiam, et a quo id sumpserit, ostendat. Le Pr.

That matter is evil? He was just now answering Hermogenes' objections as if he granted them to be true; but here he rises against him, and demands that he prove matter is evil, and show from whom he took it. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 119)

Page

running head: 229 LIBER ADV. HERMO (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A tuit esse substantiae coaequalis; B certe permissor, quia dominator; C indecorum sibi existimasset; D (21) Et ideo precario, non dominio (editors' commentary, not set)
old-edition numerals: 206 after Magna,

PL 2:230

materiam cum Creatore proponunt, ut malum a mate⟨r⟩ia, non a Creatore deducant: quando nullus omnino d⟨e⟩us liberetur ista quaestione, ut non auctor mali videri proinde possit, quisquis ille est qui malum etsi non ipse fecit, tamen a quocunque et unde passus est fieri. Audiat igitur et Hermogenes, dum alibi de mali ratione distinguimus, interim se quoque nihil egisse hac sua injectione. Ecce enim, etsi non auctor sed assentator mali invenitur Deus, qui malum materiae tanto sus⟨t⟩inuit de bono ante mundi constitutionem, quam ut bonus et mali aemulus emendasse debuerat. Aut enim potuit emendare, sed noluit: aut voluit quidem, verum non potuit infirmus Deus. Si potuit et noluit, malus et ipse, quia malo favit; et sic jam habetur auctor ejus, quod licet non instituerit, quia tamen si noluisset illud esse, non esset, ipse jam fecit esse, quod noluit non esse: quod quid est turpius? Si id voluerit esse, quod ipse noluit fecisse, adversum semetipsum egit, cum et voluit esse. Quasi bonum voluit esse, et quasi malum noluit fecisse. Quod non faciendo, malum judicavit, id sustinendo, bonum pronuntiavit, malum pro bono sustinendo et non potius eradicando, assertor ejus inventus est: male, si per voluntatem, turpiter, si per necessitatem. Aut famulus erit mali Deus, aut amicus; cum materiae malo conversatur, nedum etiam de malo ejus operatus.

set matter alongside the Creator, so that they may derive evil from matter, not from the Creator: since no god at all is freed from that question in such a way that he cannot on that account seem the author of evil, whoever he is who, even if he did not himself make evil, yet allowed it to be made by whomever and from whatever source. Let Hermogenes therefore hear too, while we treat elsewhere of the account of evil, that meanwhile he also has achieved nothing by this objection of his. For see, even if not the author yet the abettor of evil, God is found to be the One Who, being good, tolerated the evil of matter so long before the constitution of the world, whereas as good and the rival of evil He ought to have corrected it. For either He was able to correct it, but did not will to; or He willed to indeed, but was not able, a weak God. If He was able and did not will, He too is evil, because He favoured evil; and so He is now held to be its author, since, although He did not institute it, yet because it would not exist if He had been unwilling for it to exist, He Himself has now made to exist what He did not will not to exist: and what is more shameful than that? If He willed that to exist which He Himself was unwilling to have made, He acted against Himself, since He also willed it to exist. As if He willed it to exist as good, and was unwilling to have made it as evil. What by not making it He judged evil, that by tolerating it He pronounced good; by tolerating evil in place of good and not rather uprooting it, He has been found its champion: wickedly, if by will; shamefully, if by necessity. Either God will be the servant of evil, or its friend, since He keeps company with the evil of matter, not to say has also worked out of its evil.

CAPUT XI.

Chapter XI.

Et tamen unde nobis persuadet Hermogenes malam esse materiam? Non enim poterit non malum dicere cui malum adscribit. Nam definimus diminutionem et subjectionem capere non posse quod sit aeternum, ut alii coaeterno inferius deputetur. Ita et nunc nec malum dicimus competere illi, quia nec subjici ex hoc possit, quod nullo

And yet from where does Hermogenes persuade us that matter is evil? For he will not be able not to call evil that to which he ascribes evil. For we define that what is eternal cannot admit diminution and subjection, so as to be reckoned inferior to another that is coeternal. So now also we say that neither does evil befit it, because neither could it be subjected on this account, since in no

Editors' notes and page, col. 230

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁵¹ ‹anchor: assentator› · call in col 230 Assectator conjicit Jun.

Assectator ("follower"): Junius's conjecture.

⁵² ‹anchor: habetur› · call in col 230 Auctor ejus: haec vv. ab aliis omissa, addita sunt in Venet. et mss. Wouw.

Auctor ejus ("its author"): these words, omitted by the others, are added in the Venice edition and in Wouwer's manuscripts.

⁵³ ‹anchor: quia› · call in col 230 Qui solus hab. Rhen, et post eum Seml. Oberth.

Qui ("who"): Rhenanus alone has it, and after him Semler and Oberthür.

⁵⁴ ‹anchor: pronuntiavit› · call in col 230 Pronuntiavit omnes. Junius evidentius esse dicit: praenuntiavit.

Pronuntiavit ("pronounced"): all editions. Junius says praenuntiavit ("foretold") is clearer.

⁵⁵ ‹anchor: inventus est› · call in col 230 Comma pingitur in Seml.

A comma is printed here in Semler.

⁵⁶ ‹anchor: conversatur› · call in col 230 Conversatus Seml.

Conversatus ("having kept company"): Semler.

⁵⁷ ‹anchor: unde nobis› · call in col 230 Unde nobis? omnes rectius quam Seml. qui habet: non de nobis.

Unde nobis? ("from where ... us?"): all editions, more correctly than Semler, who has non de nobis ("not of us").

⁵⁸ ‹anchor: diminutionem› · call in col 230 Definimus deminutionem Jun.

Definimus deminutionem (the same sense, spelled deminutionem): Junius.

⁵⁹ ‹anchor: quod sit aeternum› · call in col 230 Posse, quod sit aeternum omnes praeter Seml. et Oberth. qui legunt: quod si ita erit.

Posse, quod sit aeternum ("can ... what is eternal"): all editions except Semler and Oberthür, who read quod si ita erit ("which, if it will be so").

Commentarius (calls in parentheses)

(24) ‹anchor: hac sua injectione› · call in col 230

(printed under page 119) (24) Sua injectione. Objectione seu argumento in contrarium contorto. Le Pr.

By this objection of his. By an objection, or an argument twisted to the contrary. Le Prieur.

(25) ‹anchor: assentator mali› · call in col 230

But the abettor of evil. As it were a champion, or, if you prefer, a dissembler: God, that is, though He knows matter to be evil, nonetheless makes use of it (which was Hermogenes' dogma), and either confirms its depravity or at least hides it. Le Prieur.

(26) ‹anchor: malam esse materiam› · call in col 230

That matter is evil? He had just been answering Hermogenes' objections as though granting they were true; here he rises against him, and demands that he prove matter to be evil, and show from whom he took this. Le Prieur.

Page

running head: R ADV. HERMOGENEM.
marginal letters: A ‹materiam cum Creatore proponunt›; B ‹quod licet non instituerit›; C ‹malo ejus operatus.›; D ‹« Non repugnavit ille›
old-edition numerals: 207 after ‹non›
other: damaged type in mate⟨r⟩ia, d⟨e⟩us, sus⟨t⟩inuit; "Ecce enim" possibly printed "cnim", read as enim; the scan's h often looks like b at low resolution (nihil, Q1a); the top of the right Commentarius column (« Non repugnavit ille … Le Pr.) ends note (23), called in col 229; translation of "tanto ... de bono" uncertain

PL 2:231

modo potest subjici, quia aeternum est. Sed cum alias summum bonum constet esse quod sit aeternum ut Deus, per quod solus est Deus, dum aeternus est, et ita bonus, dum Deus; quomodo materiae inerit malum, quam ut aeternum, summum bonum credi necesse est? Aut, si quod aeternum est poterit et mali capax esse, poterit hoc et in Deum credi: et sine causa gestivit malum a Deo transferre, si competit de aeterno competendo materiae. Jam vero, si quod aeternum est, malum potest credi invincibile, et insuperabile erit malum ut aeternum: et ita nos frustra laboramus de auferendo malo ex nobis ipsis, tum et Deus hoc frustra mandat et praecipit: imo et judicium frustra constituit Deus, injustitia utique puniturus. Quod si tunc erit mali finis, cum praeses ejus diabolus abierit in ignem, quem praeparavit illi Deus et angelis ejus (Matth. XXV), prius in puteum abyssi relegatus (Apoc. XX), cum revelatio filiorum Dei redemerit conditionem a malo utique vanitati subjectam (Rom. VIII); cum restituta innocentia et integritate conditionis, pecora condixerint bestiis, et parvuli de serpentibus luserint (Isa. XI, 6, 7); cum Pater Filio posuerit inimicos sub pedes (Psal. CIX), utique operarios mali. Utique si finis malo competit, necesse est competierit initium, eritque materia habens initium, habendo et finem mali. Quae enim malo deputantur, secundum mali statum computantur.

way can it be subjected, because it is eternal. But since it is otherwise agreed that the supreme good is that which is eternal, as God is, by which God is the only one, while He is eternal, and thus good, while He is God; how will evil be inherent in matter, which, as eternal, must be believed to be the supreme good? Or, if what is eternal will be able also to be capable of evil, this will be able to be believed of God too: and [then] without cause did he eagerly wish to transfer evil away from God, if it is applicable on the ground of the eternal by being applicable to matter. Now indeed, if, because it is eternal, evil can be believed invincible, evil will also be insuperable as being eternal: and so we labour in vain at removing evil from within ourselves, and God too commands and enjoins this in vain: nay, God has even appointed a judgement in vain, being about to punish, of course, with injustice. But if the end of evil will come at that time when its chief, the devil, shall have gone away into the fire which God has prepared for him and his angels (Matt. 25), having first been banished into the pit of the abyss (Rev. 20); when the revelation of the sons of God shall have redeemed from evil the creation, which was of course subjected to vanity (Rom. 8); when, innocence and the integrity of the creation having been restored, the cattle shall have made agreement with the wild beasts, and little children shall have played with serpents (Isa. 11:6–7); when the Father shall have put His enemies under the feet of the Son (Ps. 109), that is, the workers of evil: then surely, if an end befits evil, it is necessary that a beginning befitted it too, and matter will be something having a beginning, by having also the end of evil. For the things which are assigned to evil are reckoned according to the condition of evil.

Editors' notes and page, col. 231

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁶⁰ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Et ita Rig.; Jun. et tantum non frustra. At cod. Wouw. sic: et tum nos frustra... ipsis, tum et Deus... puniturus. Quod si, etc.; Rhen. Seml. Oberth.: et tamen nos frustra.

"And so": Rigault; Junius: "and all but in vain." But the codex, Wouwer, thus: "and then we in vain... to them, then God too... about to punish. But if," etc.; Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür: "and yet we in vain."

⁶¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Cum Seml. quin et Deus hoc frustra Lat.

Cum ("when"): Semler; "nay, and God this in vain": the Latin [editions].

⁶² ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Injustitia Rig. rectius quam Rhen. qui habet in injustitia.

Injustitia ("injustice"): Rigault, more correctly than Rhenanus, who has "in injustice."

⁶³ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Ita Rig. cod. Wouw. quibus contra malum finis Pam. Seml. Oberth.

So Rigault, the codex, Wouwer; "for whom [there is] an end against evil": Pamelius, Semler, Oberthür.

⁶⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible A malo, utique vanitati subjectam Fran. ex Rom. VIII.

"From evil, [the creation] subjected, that is, to vanity": the Franeker edition, from Romans 8.

⁶⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Convixerint Lat.

Convixerint ("shall have lived together"): the Latin [editions].

⁶⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Nec Seml.

Nec ("nor"): Semler.

⁶⁷ ‹anchor: utique operarios mali› · call in col 231 Itaque Seml. Oberth.

Itaque ("and so"): Semler, Oberthür.

⁶⁸ ‹anchor: eritque materia› · call in col 231 Erit Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

Erit ("will be"): Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

⁶⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Scilicet qui si demutabitur natura in materia, de malo in bonum demutari poterit, et in Deo de bono non in malum Seml. Oberth.

"Namely, he who [says that] if nature in matter is to be changed, it could be changed from evil into good, and in God not from good into evil": Semler, Oberthür.

⁷⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Apponit Jun.

Apponit ("adds"): Junius.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 120)

(27) ‹anchor: Imo et judicium frustra constituit Deus› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 120) (27) Imo et judicium frustra constituit Deus. Cum frequentissime Scriptura meminerit judicii Dei, videtur tamen proprie alludere ad Matth. cap. XXV. cum sequantur illa verba, quae praeparavit illi Deus et angelis ejus. Sunt autem verba illa obscurissima: Quibus contra malum finis, quibus mederi non licuit, quod hic adhuc deesset ternio variarum lectionum Vaticani codicis. Pam. — Cf. textum Pamelii cum nostro. Edd.

Nay, God has appointed judgement in vain. Though Scripture very often mentions the judgement of God, he nonetheless seems to be alluding properly to Matthew chapter 25, since there follow the words which God has prepared for him and his angels. But those words for whom [there is] an end against evil are very obscure, and could not be healed, because here the gathering of variant readings from the Vatican codex was still missing. Pamelius. — Compare Pamelius's text with ours. The editors.

(printed under page 120)

(28) ‹anchor: Prius in puteum abyssi› · call not visible

(printed under page 120) (28) Prius in puteum abyssi, etc. Alludit ad illud Apoc. XX, Et apprehendit draconem, serpentem antiquum, qui est diabolus et Satanas, et ligavit eum per annos mille, et misit eum, sive relegavit, ut hic auctor loquitur, in abyssum; sive, secundum auctorem, in puteum abyssi. Nisi malit quis referre ad illud ejusdem capitis: Et diabolus qui seducebat eos, missus est in stagnum ignis. Pam.

First into the pit of the abyss, etc. He alludes to Apocalypse 20: And he laid hold on the dragon, the old serpent, which is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and cast him, or banished him, as the author here says, into the abyss; or, following the author, into the pit of the abyss. Unless one prefers to refer it to this in the same chapter: And the devil who deceived them was cast into the pool of fire. Pamelius.

(printed under page 120)

(29) ‹anchor: Cum revelatio filiorum Dei› · call not visible

(printed under page 120) (29) Cum revelatio filiorum Dei, etc. Hic illum locum respicit Rom., VIII: Nam exspectatio creaturae revelationem filiorum Dei exspectat; vanitati enim creatura subjecta est non volens. Quam enim interpres Latinus, creaturam, Tertullianus conditionem vocat more suo, non aliter atque dixit cap. VI, de Cor. mil.: Universam conditionem invitam vanitati successisse. Pam.

When the revelation of the sons of God, etc. Here he has in view that passage of Romans 8: For the expectation of the creature waits for the revelation of the sons of God; for the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly. For what the Latin translator calls creature, Tertullian calls condition [conditio, the made world] in his own manner, just as he said in chapter 6 of On the Soldier's Crown that the whole condition had unwillingly passed under vanity. Pamelius.

30) ‹anchor: Redemerit conditionem a malo› · call not visible (opening parenthesis missing in the print) 30) Redemerit conditionem a malo. Condtionem dicit condita et creata quaeque. Paulus, ad Rom. VIII, 19: Ἡ γὰρ ἀποκαραδοκία τῆς κτίσεως τὴν ἀποκάλυψιν τῶν υἱῶν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀπεκδέχεται. Τῇ γὰρ ματαιότητι ἡ κτίσις ὑπετάγη, οὐχ ἑκοῦσα, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸν ὑποτάξαντα ἐπ' ἐλπίδι ὅτι καὶ αὐτὴ ἡ κτίσις ἐλευθερωθήσεται ἀπὸ τῆς δουλείας τῆς φθορᾶς εἰς τὴν ἐλευθερίαν τῆς δόξης τῶν τέκνων τοῦ Θεοῦ. Conditionem dicit Tertullianus, creaturam hominem creatum; Paulus, κτίσιν. Primasius Uticensis: « In ipsa carne vicit peccatum Christus, ut naturam quae fuerat bona per conditionem, et per transgressionem est vitiata, per suam gratiam reformaret. » Rig.

That he has redeemed the condition from evil. By "condition" [printed Condtionem] he means all things founded and created. Paul, Romans 8:19: "For the eager longing of the creation waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay into the freedom of the glory of the children of God." Tertullian says condition, [meaning] the creature, man as created; Paul says ktisis ("creation"). Primasius of Utica: "In the flesh itself Christ conquered sin, so that the nature which had been good by its making, and was corrupted by transgression, he might re-form by his grace." Rigault.

(printed under page 120)

(31) ‹anchor: Vanitati subjectam› · call not visible

(printed under page 120) (31) Vanitati subjectam, ματαιότητι. Praeclare hunc Pauli, adeoque Tertulliani locum explicavit Grotius annotationibus ad Epistolam Pauli. Rig.

Subjected to vanity, "to futility." Grotius has explained this passage of Paul, and so of Tertullian, admirably in his annotations on Paul's Epistle. Rigault.

(printed under page 120)

(32) ‹anchor: Pecora condixerint bestiis› · call not visible

(printed under page 120) (32) Pecora condixerint bestiis. Ut communis umbra seu commune tectum claudat oves et lupos, ut eodem quasi ad condictum amice conveniant. Rig.

The flocks shall have made a compact with the wild beasts. So that one shade or one roof shelters sheep and wolves, and they come together in friendship to the same place as if by appointment. Rigault.

(printed under page 120)

(33) ‹anchor: de serpentibus luserint› · call in col 231

(printed under page 120) (33) Et parvuli de serpentibus luserint. Pertinet hoc ad illud cap. XI Isaiae: Et puer parvulus in cavernam aspidum, etc., manum immittet. Ubi tamen videtur legisse aliquid amplius, quam hodie Graece legatur, et magis consentire cum hebraea B. Hieronymi ac Chaldaica interpretatione, quae legit: Et delectabitur parvulus super foramine aspidum. Pam.

And little children shall have played with serpents. This belongs to Isaiah chapter 11: And the little child shall put his hand into the den of asps, etc. Here, however, he seems to have read something more than is read in the Greek today, and to agree more with blessed Jerome's version from the Hebrew and with the Chaldee rendering, which reads: And the little child shall delight over the hole of the asps. Pamelius.

(printed under page 120)

Page

running head: 231 TERTULLIANI OPERUM PARS II. — (cut off at right edge)
marginal letters: A modo potest subjici; B ejus diabolus abierit in ignem; C frequentissime Scriptura meminerit (commentary); D enim creatura subjecta est non volens (commentary)
old-edition numerals: 208 after Quae

PL 2:232

CAPUT XII.

Chapter XII.

Age nunc, malam ac pessimam credamus esse materiam, utique natura; sicut Deum bonum et optimum credimus, proinde natura: porro naturam certam et fixam haberi oportebit tam in malo perseverantem apud materiam, quam in bono apud Deum inconvertibilem et indemutabilem. Scilicet quia, si demutabitur natura in materia de malo in bonum, demutari poterit et in Deo de bono in malum. Hoc loco dicet aliquis: Ergo de lapidibus filii Abrahae non suscitabuntur, et genimina viperarum non facient poenitentiae fructum (Luc. III, 7, 8), et filii irae non fient filii pacis (Ephes. II, 3), si natura mutabilis non erit. Temere ad ista exempla respicies, o homo; non enim competunt ad causam materiae, quae innata est, ea quae nata sunt, lapides, et viperae, et homines: horum enim natura habendo institutionem, habere poterit et cessationem. Materiam vero tene semel aeternam determinatam, ut infectam, ut innatam; et ideo indemutabilis et incorruptibilis naturae credendam, ex ipsius etiam sententia Hermogenis, quam opponit, cum Deum negat ex semetipso facere potuisse; quia non demutetur quod sit aeternum, amissurum scilicet quod fuerat, dum fit ex demutatione quod non erat, si non esset aeternnm: Dominum vero aeternum aliud esse non posse, quam quod est semper. Hac et ego definitione merito illum repercutiam: Materiam aeque reprehendo, cum ex illa mala pessima, etiam bona

Come now, let us believe matter to be evil, indeed most evil, namely by nature, just as we believe God to be good and most good, likewise by nature: further, its nature will have to be held certain and fixed, as persevering in evil in the case of matter as [it is] unconvertible and unchangeable in good in the case of God. Evidently because, if the nature in matter is changed from evil into good, it will also be able to be changed in God from good into evil. At this point someone will say: Then sons of Abraham will not be raised up from stones, and the broods of vipers will not produce the fruit of repentance (Luke 3:7–8), and the sons of wrath will not become sons of peace (Eph. 2:3), if nature is not to be mutable. Rashly do you look to those examples, O man; for things that are born, stones and vipers and men, do not bear upon the case of matter, which is unborn: for their nature, by having a beginning, will be able to have a cessation also. But hold matter once for all to be determined as eternal, as unmade, as unborn, and therefore to be believed to be of an unchangeable and incorruptible nature, even from the opinion of Hermogenes himself, which he puts forward when he denies that God could have made [things] out of Himself: because what is eternal is not changed, since it would lose, namely, what it had been, while it becomes by change what it was not, if it were not eternal; but that the Lord, being eternal, cannot be anything other than what He always is. With this definition I too shall rightly strike him back: I equally reproach matter, since out of it, evil and most evil, even good things

Editors' notes and page, col. 232

Page

running head: [cut off at left]UM PARS II. — SERIES I, POLEMICA. 232
marginal letters: A beside CAPUT XII. / Age nunc, malam; B beside nata sunt, lapides; C beside VIII, 19 (commentary); D beside men videtur legisse (commentary)
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 2:233

atque optima a Deo fiunt: Et vidit Deus quia bona, et benedixit ea Deus (Gen. I, 3, 34), utique qua optima, non certe qua mala ac pessima. Demutationem igitur admisit materia, et si ita est, statum aeternitatis amisit: mortua est denique sua forma. Sed aeternitas amitti non potest: quia, nisi amitti non possit, aeternitas non est. Ergo nec demutationem potuit admisisse: quia, si aeternitas est, demutari nullo modo potest.

and the best things are made by God: And God saw that they were good, and God blessed them (Gen. 1:3, 34), surely in so far as they are best, certainly not in so far as they are evil and worst. Matter therefore admitted change, and if this is so, it lost the state of eternity: in short, its own form died. But eternity cannot be lost: because, unless it be incapable of being lost, it is not eternity. Therefore neither could it have admitted change: because, if it is eternity, it can in no way be changed.

CAPUT XIII.

Chapter XIII.

Et quaeretur: Quomodo ex ea bona facta sint, quae ex demutatione nullo modo facta sunt? Unde in mala ac pessima boni atque optimi semen? Certe nec bona arbor fructus malos edit, quia nec Deus nisi bonus: nec mala arbor, bonos, quia nec materia est nisi pessima. Aut si dabimus illi aliquid etiam boni germinis, jam non erit uniformis naturae, id est malae in totum, sed et tantum duplex, id est bonae et malae naturae. Et quaeretur iterum, an in bono et malo poterit convenire luci et tenebris, dulci et amaro. Aut si potuit utriusque diversitas boni et mali concurrisse, et duplex natura fuisse materiae, amborum ferax fructuum, jam nec bona ipsa Deo deputabuntur, ut nec mala illi imputentur: sed utraque species de materiae proprietate sumpta, ad materiam pertinebit. Quo pacto, neque gratiam bonorum Deo debebimus, nec invidiam malorum, quia nihil de suo operatus ingenio.

And it will be asked: How were good things made from it, which were in no way made by change? Whence, in things evil and worst, the seed of the good and best? Certainly neither does a good tree yield evil fruits, since God is nothing but good; nor an evil tree good fruits, since matter is nothing but worst. Or if we shall grant it something also of good germ, it will no longer be of uniform nature, that is, wholly evil, but also merely twofold, that is, of a good and an evil nature. And it will be asked again whether, in good and evil, light and darkness, sweet and bitter could agree together. Or if the diversity of both, of good and of evil, could have come together, and the nature of matter have been twofold, fruitful of both kinds of fruit, then neither will the good things themselves be credited to God, just as the evil things are not imputed to Him: but each kind, taken from the property of matter, will belong to matter. In which case we shall owe God neither thanks for the good things nor odium for the evil, since He has wrought nothing from His own genius.

CAPUT XIV.

Chapter XIV.

Per quod probabitur manifeste materiae deservisse. Nam etsi dicatur, licet ex occasione materiae, suo tamen arbitrio bona protulisse, quasi nactus bonum materiae, quanquam et hoc turpe sit, certe cum ex eadem etiam mala profert, vel haec utique non de suo arbitrio proferendo, servit materiae, aliud non habens facere quam ex malo proferre; invitus utique qua bonus, ex necessitate ut invitus, et ex servitute ut ex necessitate. Quid ergo dignius, ex necessitate eum condidisse mala, an ex voluntate? Si quidem, ex necessitate condidit, si ex materia: ex voluntate, si ex nihilo. Jam enim sine causa laboras, ne malorum auctor constituatur Deus: quia, etsi de materia fecit, ipsi deputabuntur qui fecit, proinde quatenus fecit. Plane sic interest unde fecerit, ac si de nihilo fecisset: nec interest unde fecerit, ut inde fecerit, unde eum magis decuit. Magis autem eum decuit ex voluntate fecisse, quam ex necessitate, id est,

By which it will be manifestly proved that He was in servitude to matter. For even if it be said that, though on the occasion of matter, He nevertheless brought forth good things by His own will, as though He had come upon the good of matter, although this too is shameful, certainly when from the same He brings forth evil things also, at any rate these not by His own will in bringing them forth, He serves matter, having nothing else to do than to bring forth from evil; unwilling, surely, in so far as He is good, by necessity as being unwilling, and in servitude as being under necessity. Which then is more worthy, that He created evil things by necessity, or by will? Indeed, He created by necessity if from matter; by will, if from nothing. For you labour now without cause lest God be established as the author of evils: because, even if He made them from matter, they will be credited to Him Who made them, inasmuch as He made them. Plainly it makes this much difference from what He made them, as if He had made them from nothing: nor does it matter from what He made them, so long as He made them from that from which it more befitted Him. But it more befitted Him to have made them by will than by necessity, that is,

Editors' notes and page, col. 233

Footnotes

(34) ‹anchor: Si bonum in materia omnino non fuit› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 121) (34) Si bonum in materia omnino non fuit. Quoniam arbor bona malos fructus non facit, et vice versa, qua ratione e materia quam facis malam, haeretice, bonum aliquid factum esse probabis? Le Pr.

If there was no good at all in matter. Since a good tree does not bear bad fruit, and the other way round, by what reasoning, heretic, will you prove that something good was made out of matter, which you make evil? Le Prieur.

(printed under page 121)

Page

running head: 233 LIBER. ADV. HERMOG (cut off at right edge)
marginal letters: A atque optima a Deo fiunt; B Deus nisi bonus: nec mala arbor; C beside CAPUT XIV.; D constituatur Deus: quia, etsi de materia fecit
old-edition numerals: 209 after (Gen. I, 3, 34),

PL 2:234

ex nihilo potius quam ex materia. Dignius est, Deum etiam malorum auctorem liberum credere, quam servum. Quaecunque potestas ei, quam pusillitas competit. Si et sic concedimus materiam quidem nihil boni habuisse, Dominum vero, si quid boni edidit, sua virfute edidisse, aliae aeque oborientur quaestiones. Primo, si bonum in materia omnino non fuit, non ex materia bonum factum est, quod materia scilicet non habuit. Dehinc, si non ex materia, jam ergo ex Deo factum. Si nec ex Deo, jam ergo ex nihilo factum. Hoc enim superest secundum Hermogenis dispositionem.

out of nothing rather than out of matter. It is more worthy to believe God free, even as the author of evils, than a slave. Any power whatever befits Him rather than smallness. If even so we grant that matter indeed had nothing of good, but that the Lord, if He produced anything good, produced it by His own power, other questions will arise just as much. First, if good was not in matter at all, good was not made out of matter, since matter, of course, did not have it. Next, if not out of matter, then it was made out of God. If not out of God either, then it was made out of nothing. For this is what remains according to Hermogenes' arrangement.

CAPUT XV.

Chapter XV.

Porro si bonum, neque ex materia factum est quia non erat in illa, ut in mala; neque ex Deo, quia nihil potuit ex Deo fieri, sicut definit Hermogenes: invenitur bonum jam ex nihilo factum, ut ex nullo factum, ut neque ex materia, neque ex Deo. Et si bonum ex nihilo, cur non et malum? imo cur non omnia ex nihilo, si aliquid ex nihilo? nisi si insufficiens fuit divina virtus omnibus producendis, quae aliquid protulerit ex nihilo. Aut si ex materia mala bonum processit, quia neque ex nihilo, neque ex Deo, sequetur ut ex conversione processerit materiae, contra denegatam aeterni conversionem. Ita unde bonum constitit, jam negabit Hermogenes inde illud constare potuisse. Necesse est autem ex aliquo eorum processerit, ex quibus negavit procedere potuisse. Caeterum, si ideo malum non ex nihilo, ne Dei fiat, de cujus arbitrio videbitur, sed ex materia, ut ipsius sit, de cujus substantia erit factum: et hic, ⟨ut⟩ dixi, auctor mali habebitur Deus, qui cum eadem virtute et voluntate debuisset omnia bona ex materia protulisse, aut tantum bona, non omnia tamen bona, protulisset etiam mala; utique aut volens esse mala, si poterat efficere ne essent; aut non valens efficere omnia bona, si voluit et non fecit: du⟨m⟩ nihil intersit per infirmitatem Dominus auctor mali exstiterit, an per voluntatem. Aut quae fuit ratio, ut cum bona fecisset quasi bonus, etiam mala protulisset quasi non bonus, cum non congruentia sibi solummodo edidit. Quid necesse erat, suo opere prolato, etiam materiae negotium curare, proinde et malum proferendo solus ut cognosceretur bonus de bono, materia autem ne cognosceretur mala de malo? Plus bonum floruisset sine mali afflatu. Nam et Hermogenes

Further, if good was made neither out of matter, because it was not in it, as being evil, nor out of God, because nothing could be made out of God, as Hermogenes defines: good is then found to have been made out of nothing, as made out of no thing, so as to be neither out of matter nor out of God. And if good is out of nothing, why not evil too? Indeed, why not all things out of nothing, if anything is out of nothing? Unless the divine power, which brought forth something out of nothing, was insufficient for producing all things. Or if good proceeded out of evil matter, because [it proceeded] neither out of nothing nor out of God, it will follow that it proceeded out of a change of matter, contrary to the denial of change to what is eternal. Thus Hermogenes will now deny that good could have come into being from that from which it came into being. Yet it must have proceeded from one of those things from which he denied that it could have proceeded. Moreover, if evil is not out of nothing for this reason, that it may not become God's, by Whose will it would seem [to exist], but out of matter, that it may belong to that out of whose substance it will have been made: here too, as I have said, God will be held the author of evil, Who, when by the same power and will He ought to have brought forth all things good out of matter, or only good things, yet not all things good, brought forth evil things too; certainly either willing that there should be evil things, if He was able to bring it about that they should not exist; or not able to make all things good, if He willed it and did not do it: while it makes no difference whether the Lord became the author of evil through weakness or through will. Or what reason was there that, when He had made good things as being good, He should also have brought forth evil things as being not good, when He produced only things not befitting Himself? What need was there, His own work having been brought forth, to concern Himself also with the business of matter, and so, by bringing forth evil, that He alone might be known as good from the good, but that matter might not be known as evil from the evil? The good would have flourished more without the breath of evil. For Hermogenes too

Editors' notes and page, col. 234

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁷¹ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible In Venet. absunt, haud dubio errore typographiae, verba: malae in totum, sed et tantum duplex, id est.

In the Venice edition, no doubt by a printer's error, the words "evil altogether, but also only twofold, that is" are missing.

⁷² ‹anchor: ex conversione› · call in col 234 Confessione Venet. male.

Confessione ("by confession"): the Venice edition, wrongly.

⁷³ ‹anchor: contra denegatam aeterni› · call in col 234 Contra denegatam omnes, praeter Seml. Oberth.

Contra denegatam ("against the denied"): all except Semler and Oberthür.

⁷⁴ ‹anchor: debuisset omnia bona› · call in col 234 Rig. et Venet inserit bona e cod. Wouw.

Rigault and the Venice edition insert bona ("good") from the codex, Wouwer.

⁷⁵ ‹anchor: non omnia tamen bona› · call in col 234 Aut tantum bona (non omnia tamen bona) protulisset; aut etiam mala Jun.; sed non opus est.

"Or he would have brought forth only good things (yet not all good); or also evil": Junius; but there is no need.

⁷⁶ ‹anchor: fecisset quasi› · call in col 234 Qua bonus qua non b. Lat.

"In so far as good, in so far as not good": the Latin [editions].

⁷⁷ ‹anchor: bonus de bono› · call in col 234 Hoc signum interrog. in rel. ponitur demum post malo.

In the rest [of the editions] this question mark is placed only after malo ("evil").

⁷⁸ ‹anchor: autem ne› · call in col 234 Ut cognosceretur Jun.

Ut cognosceretur ("that it might be known"): Junius.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 121)

Page

running head: ADV. HERMOGENEM. (printed blurred, looks like HBRMOGBNBM)
marginal letters: A ex nihilo potius quam ex materia; B Porro si bonum; C tuisse. Necesse est autem; D non congruentia sibi solummodo
old-edition numerals: 210 after credere,

PL 2:235

expugnat quorumdam argumentationes, dicentium mala necessaria fuisse ad illuminationem bonorum, ex contrariis intelligendorum. Ergo aut nec propterea locus mali proferendi fuit, aut si qua alia ratio exigit illud induci, cur non et ex nihilo potuerit induci, ipsa ratione excusatura Dominum ne mali auctor existimaretur, quae nunc cum de materia operatur mala, excusat: si excusat, adeo ubique et undique illuc compellitur quaestio quo nolunt, qui, ipsam mali rationem non examinando, nec dignoscendo quomodo illud aut Deo attribuant, aut a Deo separent, pluribus et indignioribus destructionibus Deum objiciunt.

attacks the arguments of certain people who say that evils were necessary for the illumination of goods, which are to be understood from their contraries. Therefore either there was no occasion on that account for evil to be brought forth, or, if some other reason requires it to be introduced, why could it not also have been introduced from nothing, since that very reason would excuse the Lord from being thought the author of evil, the reason which now, when He works evils out of matter, excuses Him? If it excuses Him, then everywhere and on every side the question is driven to the place where they do not want it to go, those who, by not examining the very reason of evil, and not discerning how they are either to attribute it to God or to separate it from God, expose God to more numerous and more unworthy demolitions.

CAPUT XVI.

Chapter XVI.

Igitur in praestructione hujus articuli, et alibi forsitan retractandi, equidem diffinio, aut Deo ascribendum et bonum et malum quae ex materia fecit, aut materiae ipsi, ex qua fecit; aut utrumque utrique, quia ambo sibi obligantur qui fecit et de qua fecit: aut alterum alteri; tertius enim, praeter materiam et Deum, non est. Porro si Dei erit utrumque, videbitur Deus etiam mali auctor: Deus autem ut bonus, auctor mali non erit; si materiae utrumquc, videbitur materia etiam boni matrix; mala autem in totum materia boni non erit matrix; si utriusque erit, utrumque; in hoc quoque comparabitur Deo materia, et partes erunt ambo, ex aequo mali ac boni affines; aequari autem Deo materia non debet, ne duos deos efficiat; si alterum alterius, utique Dei bonum, et materiae malum; neque malum Deo, neque materiae bonum ascribitur: et bona autem et mala Deus, de materia faciendo, cum ea facit. Haec si ita sunt, nescio qua possit evadere sententia Hermogenis qui Deum, quoque modo de materia malum condidit, sive voluntate, sive necessitate, sive ratione, non putet mali auctorem. Porro, si mali auctor est ipse qui fecit, plane socia materia per substantiae suggestum, excludis jam causam materiae introducendae. Nihilominus enim, et per materiam Deus auctor mali ostenditur, si ideo materia praesumpta

Therefore, in laying the groundwork for this point, which is perhaps to be treated again elsewhere, I for my part define that either both the good and the evil which He made out of matter are to be ascribed to God, or to the matter itself out of which He made them; or both to both, because both are bound to each other, He who made and that out of which He made; or the one to the one and the other to the other; for there is no third besides matter and God. Further, if both will be God's, God will appear to be the author of evil too: but God, as good, will not be the author of evil; if both are matter's, matter will appear to be the mother of good too; but matter, being wholly evil, will not be the mother of good; if they will be of both, both [are answerable]; in this too matter will be compared with God, and both will be partners, kin equally to evil and to good; but matter ought not to be made equal to God, lest it make two gods; if the one belongs to the one and the other to the other, then surely the good is God's and the evil matter's; neither is evil ascribed to God, nor good to matter: and yet God, by making from matter, makes both good things and evil things together with it. If these things are so, I do not know by what way the opinion of Hermogenes can escape, who does not consider God, in whatever manner He produced evil from matter, whether by will, or by necessity, or by reason, to be the author of evil. Further, if He Himself who made it is the author of evil, matter being plainly His associate through the furnishing of substance, you now exclude the reason for introducing matter. For nonetheless God is shown to be the author of evil even through matter, if matter was for that reason presupposed

Editors' notes and page, col. 235

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁷⁹ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Cum inseritur in caeteris; melius, ait Seml. qui et mittit.

Cum ("when") is inserted in the rest; better, says Semler, who also omits it [printed mittit].

⁸⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Cum abest hic ab omnibus

Cum is absent here from all [the editions].

⁸¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Deus Seml. Oberth. Rig. Wouw. Dei fuerit Jun.

Deus ("God"): Semler, Oberthür, Rigault, Wouwer; "it will be God's": Junius.

⁸² ‹anchor: si materiae› · call in col 235 Materia Seml. Oberth.

Materia ("matter"): Semler, Oberthür.

⁸³ ‹anchor: utique Dei› · call in col 235 Utique Dei, ita Wouw. recte. Utique Deus Seml. Utique Dei Rig.

"Certainly God's," so Wouwer, rightly. "Certainly God": Semler. "Certainly God's": Rigault.

⁸⁴ ‹anchor: sententia Hermogenis› · call in col 235 Hermogenes Seml.

Hermogenes (nominative): Semler.

⁸⁵ ‹anchor: qui Deum› · call in col 235 Qui Deus Rhen.

"Who, God": Rhenanus.

⁸⁶ ‹anchor: excludis› · call in col 235 Excusas. Rhen.

Excusas ("you excuse"): Rhenanus.

⁸⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Interim et quae putas Rhen. cum punct, sign. ante interim.

"Meanwhile also the things you think": Rhenanus, with a punctuation mark before interim.

⁸⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Inserit Lat. quia.

The Latin [editions] insert quia ("because").

⁸⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Aderit. Seml.

Aderit ("will be present"): Semler.

⁹⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible De aliqua Jun.

De aliqua ("from some"): Junius.

⁹¹ ‹anchor: ut viam› · call in col 236 Et viam Jun.

Et viam ("and the way"): Junius.

⁹² ‹anchor: haec illi› · call in col 236 Illis Paris. Fran. illi prob. a Jun.

Illis ("to them"): Paris and Franeker editions; illi ("to him") approved by Junius.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 122)

(35) ‹anchor: per substantiae suggestum› · call in col 235

(printed under page 122) (35) Plane socia materia per substantiae contextum. Utitur non raro hac voce, aliquando pro ornamento seu decoris additione, ut hoc in loco, de Cultu femin., cap. II: « Jam non tantum confictae et elaboratae libidinis suggestum recusandum a vobis sciatis, sed etiam, » etc. Aliquando pro compagine seu contextu, de Pallio, cap. 1, ubi sacer suggestus. Glossae non abludunt ab hoc significatu, snggestum enim redditur σῆμα, ὕφος. Et alio loco ὕφος, textura. Et Apolog., cap. 16, imaginum suggestus. Le Pr.

Matter, plainly a partner, through the texture of its substance. He uses this word [suggestus] not seldom, sometimes for ornament or an added adornment, as in this place, On the Apparel of Women, chapter 2: "Know now that you must refuse not only the trappings of feigned and laboured lust, but also," etc. Sometimes for a framework or fabric, On the Pallium, chapter 1, where [we have] sacred structure. The Glossaries are not far from this meaning, for suggestum [printed snggestum] is rendered sēma, hyphos ("sign, web"). And in another place hyphos, "texture." And Apology, chapter 16, a structure of images. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 122)

(36) ‹anchor: Non aliter unici› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 122) (36) Non aliter unici. Regulam hanc a Tertulliano sume aliis communem: Deus aut unus est aut nullus. Impium enim et damnabile aliquid Deo aequale cogitare; solus ipse Creator ac servator, solus Dominus et arbiter rerum omnium, et, si liceat profanum illud in re omnium gravissima usurpare, οὐκ ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη. Le Pr.

Not otherwise than of one alone. Take from Tertullian this rule, common to others too: God is either one or none. For it is impious and damnable to think anything equal to God; he alone is Creator and preserver, he alone Lord and arbiter of all things, and, if one may borrow that profane saying in the weightiest matter of all, "the rule of many is not good." Le Prieur.

(printed under page 122) (57) Sophiam suam scilicet. Dei sapientiam intelligit, quae adeo hominum mentes et cogitationem superat, ut universa mundi sapientia stultitia summa sit apud Deum. Unde Sophiam illam non apud philosophos, sed Prophetas quaerendam decet. De Deo enim recte loqui non potest, qui Deum non novit, ut philosophi, qui gloriae animalia Septimio sunt; verum prophetae et sancti ejusdem summi Dei Spiritu afflati. Le Pr.

His own Sophia, namely. He means the wisdom of God, which so far surpasses the minds and thought of men that all the wisdom of the world is the height of folly before God. Hence that Sophia must be sought not among the philosophers but among the Prophets. For he who does not know God cannot speak rightly of God, as the philosophers, who for Septimius are "creatures of vainglory"; but the prophets and saints, breathed upon by the Spirit of the same most high God, [can]. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 122)

Page

running head: 235 TERTULLIANI OPERUM PARS II. — (cut off at image edge)
marginal letters: A mogenes expugnat quorumdam argumentationes; B Igitur in praestructione hujus articuli; C Deo materia non debet, ne duos deos efficiat; D (none visible)
old-edition numerals: 211 after intelligendorum.

PL 2:236

est, ne Deus mali auctor videretur. Exclusa itaque materia, dum excluditur causa ejus, superest uti Deum omnia ex nihilo fecisse constet. Videbimus an et mala, cum apparuerit quae mala, et an mala interim ea quae putas. Dignius enim de suo arbitrio produxit, haec quoque producendo de nihilo quam de praejudicio alieno, si de materia produxisset. Libertas, non necessitas, Deo competit: malo voluerit mala a semetipso, condidisse, quam non potuerit non condidisse.

lest God should seem the author of evil. Matter, then, being excluded, since its cause is excluded, it remains that it be established that God made all things out of nothing. We shall see whether evil things too [He made], when it has become apparent which things are evil, and whether the things you consider evil are in the meantime evil. For He produced more worthily from His own will, producing these too out of nothing, than from the prejudgement of another, had He produced them out of matter. Freedom, not necessity, befits God: I would rather that He willed to have created evil things of Himself than that He was unable not to have created them.

CAPUT XVII.

Chapter XVII.

Unici Dei status hanc regulam vindicat: non aliter unici, nisi quia solius: non aliter solius, nisi quia nihil cum illo: sic et primus erit, quia omnia post illum: sic omnia post illum, quia omnia ab illo: sic ab illo, quia ex nihilo, ut illi quoque Scripturae ratio constet: Quis cognovit sensum Domini, aut quis illi consiliarius fuit? aut quem consultatus est? aut viam intelligentiae et scientiae quis demonstravit illi? quis tradidit, et retribuetur ei? (Rom. VI, 34, 35) Nemo utique: quia nulla vis, nulla materia, nulla natura substantiae alterius aderat illi. Porro, si de aliquo operatus est, necesse est ab ea ipsa acceperit et consilium et tractatum dispositionis, ut viam intelligentiae et scientiae. Pro qualitate enim rei operari habuit et secundum ingenium materiae, non secundum suum arbitrium, adeo ut mala pro natura, non sua, sed substantiae, fecerit.

The state of the one God vindicates this rule: He is not otherwise the one except because He is alone; not otherwise alone except because nothing is with Him; so He will also be first, because all things are after Him; so all things are after Him, because all things are from Him; so they are from Him, because they are out of nothing; so that the reasoning of that Scripture too may hold good: Who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been His counsellor? or whom did He consult? or who showed Him the way of understanding and knowledge? who has given, and it shall be repaid him? (Rom. 11:34–35) Nobody, surely: because no power, no matter, no nature of another substance was present to Him. Moreover, if He worked from something, it must be that He received from that very thing both the counsel and the planning of His arrangement, as the way of understanding and knowledge. For He would have had to work according to the quality of the thing and according to the disposition of matter, not according to His own will, so that He would have made evil things according to a nature not His own but that of the substance.

CAPUT XVIII.

Chapter XVIII.

Si necessaria est Deo materia ad opera mundi ut Hermogenes existimavit, habuit Deus materiam longe digniorem et idoneiorem, non apud philosophos aestimandam, sed apud prophetas intelligendam, Sophiam suam scilicet; haec denique sola cognovit sensum Domini. Quis enim scit quae sunt Dei, et quae in ipso, nisi Spiritus qui in ipso? (I Cor. II, 11). Sophia autem Spiritus, haec illi consiliarius fuit, via intelligentiae et scientiae ipsa est (Prov. VIII. 27 seqq.). Ex hac fecit, faciendo per illam, et faciendo cum illa: Cum pararet caelum,

If matter is necessary to God for the works of the world, as Hermogenes supposed, God had a matter far worthier and more suitable, one not to be assessed among the philosophers but to be understood among the prophets, namely His own Wisdom; she indeed alone has known the mind of the Lord. For who knows the things which are of God, and those which are in Him, except the Spirit who is in Him? (1 Cor. 2:11). But Wisdom is Spirit; she was His counsellor, she herself is the way of understanding and knowledge (Prov. 8:27 ff.). From her He made, making through her and making with her: When He was preparing the heaven,

Editors' notes and page, col. 236

Footnotes

(57) ‹anchor: Sophiam suam scilicet› · call in col 236 (printed "(57)" in text and note, in sequence for 37)

(printed under page 122)

Page

running head: [cut off at left edge] UM PARS II. — SERIES I, POLEMICA. 236
marginal letters: A sumpta est, ne Deus mali; B ab illo: sic ab illo, quia ex nihilo; C beside CAPUT XVIII.; D (none)
old-edition numerals: 212 after uti

PL 2:237

inquit, aderam illi; et cum fortia faciebat (super ventos) quae sursum nubila, et cum firmos ponebat fontes ejus quae sub caelo est, ego eram compingens cum ipso. Ego eram ad quam gaudebat, quotidie autem oblectabar in persona ejus (Ibid.): quando oblectabatur cum perfecisset orbem, et inoblectabatur in filiis hominum. Quis non hanc potius omnium fontem et originem commendet, materiam vero materiarum, non sibi subditam, non statu diversam, non motu inquietam, non habitu informem, sed insitam et propriam et compositam et decoram, quali Deus potuit eguisse, sui magis quam alieni egens? Denique, ut necessariam sensit ad opera mundi, statim eam condit et generat in semetipso: Dominus, inquit, condidit me initium viarum suarum in opera sua: ante saecula fundavit me, prius quam faceret terram, prius quam montes collocarentur; ante omnes autem colles generavit me; prior autem abysso genita sum (Ibid.). Agnoscat ergo Hermogenes idcirco etiam Sophiam Dei natam et conditam praedicari, ne quid innatum et inconditum praeter solum Deum crederemus. Si enim intra Dominum quod ex ipso et in ipso fuit, sine initio non fuit: Sophia scilicet ipsius exinde nata et condita, ex quo in sensu Dei ad opera mundi disponenda coepit agitari: multo magis non capit sine initio quidquam fuisse quo extra Dominum fuerit. Si vero Sophia eadem Dei sermo est sensu sophia et sine quo factum est nihil (Joan. I, 3), sicut et dispositum sine sophia, quale est ut Filio Dei sermone unigenito et primogenito aliquid fuerit praeter Patrem antiquius: et hoc modo utique generosius, nedum quod innatum nato fortius, et quod infectum facto validius? quia quod ut esset nullius eguit auctoris, multo sublimius erit eo quod, ut esset, aliquem habuit auctorem: proinde, si malum quidem innatum est, natus autem sermo

he says, I was present with Him; and when He made strong (above the winds) the clouds on high, and when He set firm the fountains of that which is under heaven, I was framing [it] together with Him. I was she in whom He rejoiced, and daily I took delight in His presence (ibid.): when He took delight, having completed the world, and was delighted in the sons of men. Who would not rather commend this [Wisdom] as the fount and origin of all things, the matter indeed of matters, not subjected to Him, not differing in state, not restless in motion, not formless in condition, but inborn and His own and well ordered and comely, such as God could have needed, being in need of what was His own rather than of what was another's? Finally, as soon as He perceived her to be necessary for the works of the world, He at once founds and begets her within Himself: The Lord, it says, founded me as the beginning of His ways for His works; before the ages He established me, before He made the earth, before the mountains were set in place; and before all the hills He begot me; and before the abyss I was begotten (ibid.). Let Hermogenes therefore acknowledge that the very Wisdom of God is proclaimed as born and founded for this reason, lest we should believe anything to be unborn and unfounded except God alone. For if that which was within the Lord, from Him and in Him, was not without beginning (namely His Wisdom, born and founded from the time when it began to be stirred in the mind of God for the arranging of the works of the world), much more is it impossible that anything which was outside the Lord should have been without beginning. But if this same Wisdom is the Word of God, in sense wisdom, and that without which nothing was made (John 1:3), just as nothing was arranged without wisdom, how can it be that anything apart from the Father should have been older than the Son of God, the only-begotten and first-begotten Word: and in this way certainly nobler, not to say that the unborn is stronger than the born, and the unmade mightier than the made? For that which needed no author in order to exist will be far more sublime than that which, in order to exist, had some author: accordingly, if evil indeed is unborn, while the Word is born

Editors' notes and page, col. 237

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁹³ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Montes Rhen. Seml. Jun.

Montes ("mountains"): Rhenanus, Semler, Junius.

⁹⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Materiarum abest in lib. Pithaei. Rig. Jun. legit: materiam vero materiarum non sic subditam ex Hirsaug. cod. Rhen. fide.

Materiarum ("of materials") is absent in Pithou's copy. Rigault and Junius read "but matter not so subject to the materials," from the Hirsau codex, on the authority of Rhenanus.

⁹⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Quali Deo potuit eguisse? sui magis quam alieni Seml. Oberth. Alienis genus cod. Hirsaug.; unde Rhen. voluit: Suis magis quam alienigenis.

"Of what kind of God could he have needed? Of his own rather than another's": Semler, Oberthür. Alienis genus: the Hirsau codex; whence Rhenanus wanted "of his own rather than of foreign-born things."

⁹⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Ea Venet.

Ea ("she" / "those things"): the Venice edition.

⁹⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Prior item abysso Jun.

"Likewise prior to the abyss": Junius.

⁹⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Genita sum. Cum agnoscat, Rhen. Oberth. Semler. invitus et improbans.

"I was begotten. Since he acknowledges": Rhenanus, Oberthür; Semler unwillingly and disapproving.

⁹⁹ ‹anchor: est sensu sophia› · call in col 237 Sermo est, sensus Sophia Jun. Sensus et Sophia lib. Pithaei.

"Is the Word, the mind [is] Sophia": Junius. "Mind and Sophia": Pithou's copy.

¹ ‹anchor: quod innatum› · call in col 237 Nato inseritur Fran.

Nato ("than the born") is inserted in the Franeker edition.

² ‹anchor: infectum facto› · call in col 237 Factum Seml. Oberth.

Factum ("made"): Semler, Oberthür.

³ ‹anchor: natus autem› · call in col 237 Innatum est, id est Sermo Dei Seml. Oberth.

"Is unborn, that is, the Word of God": Semler, Oberthür.

⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Ingratiis Jun.

Ingratiis ("against its will"): Junius.

⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Occasiones ibi Jun.

"Occasions there": Junius.

⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Proprietatem cum vindicamus Seml.

"When we claim the property": Semler.

⁷ ‹anchor: Deus fecit suorum› · call in col 238 Universum Lat. In impressa Correct. habet universorum C. Macrus. Jun.

Universum ("the universe"): the Latin [editions]. In the printed Correctorium, C. Macrus has universorum ("of all things"). Junius.

⁸ ‹anchor: praefatur Scriptura› · call in col 238 Merito sic praefatur Scriptura alii. Esse proprie principium, quo priora sunt facta, meritoque sic praefatam Scripturam: In principio, Jun.

"Rightly does Scripture so begin": others. "That it is properly the beginning, by which the earlier things were made, and that rightly did Scripture begin thus: In the beginning": Junius.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 123)

(38) ‹anchor: quidquam fuisse› · call in col 237

(printed under page 123) (38) Non capit sine initio quicquam fuisse. Usum hujus impersonalis verbi, capit, quod Graecis est, ἐνδέχεται, apud Tertullianum in libris praecedentibus disces ubique et saepe. Hic tantum valet, non capit quicquam fuisse, ac si dicas; Fieri non potest. Rhen.

It does not admit that anything was without beginning. You will learn the use of this impersonal verb capit ("it admits"), which in Greek is endechetai, everywhere and often in Tertullian in the preceding books. Here it does not admit that anything was means as much as if you said: it cannot be. Rhenanus.

(printed under page 123)

(39) ‹anchor: Nam et ipsum principium, in quo Deus fecit coelum et terram› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 123) (39) Nam et ipsum principium, in quo Deus fecit coelum et terram. Omnes istas tricas facile expedire videtur qui verba Mosis, In principio creavit Deus coelum et terram, sic interpretatur: « Quo exstiterunt initio coelum et terra, eo Deus illa creavit. » Hoc enim voluit Moses; coeli ac terrae nominibus mundum universum significavit a Deo creatum. Deinde explicat quo ordine et modo praecipua quaeque sint creata. Rig. — Quidquid dixerint Tertullianus et ejus adnotatores, nihilominus multi inveniuntur Ecclesiae doctores qui illud Genes. I, 1, In principio, de Verbo Dei accipiunt; sic Basilius, Ambrosius, etc. Alii alium sensum his verbis tribuunt, ut videre est apud Corn. a Lapide. vel in Curs. compl. Script. sacrae. Edd.

For the beginning itself, in which God made heaven and earth. Whoever interprets Moses' words In the beginning God created heaven and earth thus: "At the beginning at which heaven and earth came to be, at that God created them," seems to clear up all these tangles easily. For this is what Moses meant: by the names of heaven and earth he signified the whole world created by God. Then he explains in what order and manner each of the chief things was created. Rigault. — Whatever Tertullian and his annotators may have said, many doctors of the Church are nonetheless found who take that In the beginning of Genesis 1:1 of the Word of God: so Basil, Ambrose, etc. Others give these words another sense, as may be seen in Cornelius a Lapide, or in the Cursus completus Scripturae sacrae. The editors.

(printed under page 123) (48) Ita principium sive initium, etc. Verisimile est, ut hanc significationem principii indicaret auctor, propterea alibi ab eo verti solere, cum dictam Scripturam citat: In primordio fecit Deus coelum et terram, sicuti supra, lib. de Baptismo, cap. 3, 5. Pam.

So "principle" or "beginning," etc. It is likely that, to indicate this meaning of principium, the author is accustomed elsewhere to render it so when he cites this Scripture: In the first beginning God made heaven and earth, as above, in the book On Baptism, chapters 3 and 5. Pamelius.

(printed under page 123)

Page

running head: 237 LIBER ADV. HERMOGENEM (cut off at right edge of image)
marginal letters: A inquit, aderam illi; B opera sua : ante saecula fundavit me; C factum est nihil (Joan. I, 3); D (38) Non capit sine initio (in the Commentarius at page foot)
old-edition numerals: 218 after autem
other: "inoblectabatur" set as printed, possibly for "in oblectabatur" or "oblectabatur"; "sensu" before sophia partly damaged, could read "sensa"; "quo extra Dominum" set as printed (perhaps for "quod"); Variae lectiones and the editors' Commentarius (notes 38-39) at the page foot not set; right column (238) cut off and not set

PL 2:238

Dei: Eructavit enim, inquit, sermonem optimum (Psal. XLIV, 1), non scio an bono malum possit adduci, validius ab infirmo, ut innatum a nato. Ita et hoc nomine materiam Deo praeponit Hermogenes, praeponendo eam Filio. Filius enim Sermo, et Deus Sermo (Joan I, 1); et: Ego et Pater unum sumus (Joan. X, 10): nisi quod sustinebit aequo animo filius eam praeponi sibi, quae Patri adaequatur.

of God: for it says, [My heart] has belched forth a most excellent Word (Ps. 44:1). I do not know whether evil can be drawn from good, the stronger from the weaker, as the unborn from the born. So by this name too Hermogenes sets matter before God, by setting it before the Son. For the Son is the Word, and the Word is God (John 1:1); and: I and the Father are one (John 10:30). Unless indeed the Son will bear with equanimity that matter, which is made equal to the Father, be set before Himself.

CAPUT XIX.

Chapter XIX.

Sed et ad originale instrumentum Moysi provocabo, unde et diversa pars suspiciones suas ingratis fulcire conatur, ne scilicet non inde instrui videretur unde oportet. Itaque occasiones sibi sumpsit quorumdam verborum, ut haereticis fere mos est simplicia quaeque torquere. Nam et ipsum principium, in quo Deus fecit coelum et terram, aliquid volunt fuisse quasi substantivum et corpulentum, quod in materiam interpretari possit. Nos autem unicuique vocabulo proprietatem suam vindicamus, principium initium esse, et competisse ita poni rebus incipientibus fieri. Nihil enim, quod fieri habet, sine initio esse, quin initium sit illi ipsum dum incipit fieri. Ita principium sive initium, incoeptionis esse verbum, non alicujus substantiae nomen. Jam nunc, si principalia Dei opera coelum et terra sunt, quae ante omnia Deus fecit suorum esse proprie principium, quae priora sunt facta, merito sic praefatur Scriptura: In principio fecit Deus coelum et terram (Gen. I, 1); quemadmodum dixisset: In finem Deus fecit coelum et terram: si post universa fecisset. Aut si principium aliqua substantia est, erit et finis aliqua materia. Plane licebit etiam substantivum aliquid principium esse alii rei, quae ex ipso sit futura, ut argilla principium testae, ut semen principium herbaei Sed cum ita utimur vocabulo principii quasi originis, non quasi ordinis nomine, adjicimus

But I will also appeal to the original document of Moses, from which the opposing party too tries, to no purpose, to prop up its suspicions, lest, that is, it should seem not to be instructed from the source from which it ought. And so it has taken for itself occasions from certain words, as it is almost the custom of heretics to twist whatever is simple. For they would have the very beginning, in which God made heaven and earth, to have been something as it were substantial and corporeal, which could be interpreted as matter. We, however, claim for each word its own proper meaning: that 'beginning' is 'commencement', and that it was fitting for it to be so applied to things that are beginning to be made. For nothing that is to be made exists without a commencement; rather, its commencement is the very moment when it begins to be made. So 'beginning' or 'commencement' is a word of inception, not the name of any substance. Now then, if heaven and earth are the principal works of God, which God made before all things, so that those which were made first are properly the beginning of His works, rightly does Scripture preface thus: In the beginning God made heaven and earth (Gen. 1:1); just as it would have said: At the end God made heaven and earth, if He had made them after all things. Or if the beginning is some substance, the end too will be some matter. Certainly it will be permissible also for something substantial to be the beginning of another thing which is to come from it, as clay is the beginning of the pot, as seed is the beginning of the plant. But since we use the word 'beginning' thus in the sense of origin, not as a term of order, we add

Editors' notes and page, col. 238

Footnotes

(48) ‹anchor: principium sive initium› · call in col 238, printed "(40)" in the text

(printed under page 123)

Page

running head: [cut off at left] V. HERMOGENEM. (presumably ADV. HERMOGENEM.)
marginal letters: A ‹Dei: Eructavit enim, inquit›; B ‹mos est simplicia quaeque torquere›; C ‹cipio fecit Deus coelum et terram›; D ‹creata. RIG. — Quidquid dixerint (in the Commentarius notes)›
old-edition numerals: 214 after ‹sumus (Joan. X, 10):›

PL 2:239

et mentionem ipsius rei specialiter, quam volumus principium alterius rei. De caetero si sic ponamus, verbi gratia. In principio fecit figulus pelvim vel urnam; jam non materiam significabit principium: non enim argillam nominavi principium, sed ordinem operis; quia figulus ante caetera primum pelvim et urnam fecit, exinde facturus et caetera; ad ordinationem operum principii vocabulum pertinebit, non ad originem substantiarum. Possum et aliter principium interpretari, non ab re tamen: nam et in Graeco principii vocabulum, quod est ΑΡΧΗ, non tantum ordinativum, sed et potestativum capit principatum. Unde et ἄρχοντας dicunt principes et magistratus. Ergo secundum hanc quoque significationem, principium pro principatu et potestate sumetur. In principatu enim et in potestate Deus fecit coelum et terram.

also the mention of the thing itself specifically, when we intend [it as] the beginning of another thing. For the rest, if we put it thus, for example: In the beginning the potter made a basin or a jar; here "beginning" will not signify the material: for I have not named the clay as the beginning, but the order of the work; because the potter made the basin and the jar first before the other things, intending thereafter to make the other things also; the word "beginning" will relate to the ordering of the works, not to the origin of the substances. I can also interpret "beginning" in another way, yet not beside the point: for in Greek too the word for "beginning", which is ARCHE, takes on not only an ordinal but also a potestative sense, namely principality. Hence too they call princes and magistrates "archontas". Therefore according to this meaning as well, "beginning" will be taken for principality and power. For in principality and in power God made the heaven and the earth.

CAPUT XX.

Chapter XX.

Sed ut nihil aliud significet Graeca vox, quam principium, et principium nihil aliud capiat, quam initium, habemus etiam illam agnoscere, quae dicit: Dominus condidit me initium viarum suarum in opera sua. Si enim per Sophiam Dei omnia facta sunt; et coelum ergo et terram Deus faciens in principio, id est initio, in Sophia sua fecit. Denique si principium materiam significaret, non ita Scriptura inscripsisset In principio Deus fecit, sed ex principio. Non enim in materia, sed ex materia fecisset. De Sophia autem potuit dici, in principio. In Sophia enim primo fecit, in qua cogitando et disponendo jam fecerat; quoniam etsi ex materia facturus fuisset, ante in Sophia cogitando et disponendo jam fecerat. Quoniam etsi erat initium viarum, quia cogitatio et dispositio prima Sophiae fit operatio de cogitatu viam operibus instituens, hanc et inde auctoritatem Scripturae mihi vindico, quod et

But granting that the Greek word signifies nothing other than "beginning", and that "beginning" takes in nothing other than "commencement", we have also to recognize her who says: The Lord founded me as the beginning of His ways unto His works. For if all things were made through the Wisdom of God, then God, making both the heaven and the earth in the beginning, that is, in the commencement, made them in His Wisdom. Finally, if "beginning" signified matter, Scripture would not have written In the beginning God made, but out of the beginning. For He would have made not in matter, but out of matter. But of Wisdom it could be said, in the beginning. For in Wisdom He made first, in which by thinking and arranging He had already made; since even if He had been going to make out of matter, He had already made beforehand in Wisdom by thinking and arranging. Since, even if it was the beginning of ways, because thought and arrangement is the first operation of Wisdom, laying down from thought a way for the works, I claim for myself from this too the authority of Scripture, in that also

Editors' notes and page, col. 239

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁹ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Significabit edd. omnes et Jun.

Significabit ("will signify"): all the editions and Junius.

¹⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Possunt et aliter Seml. Oberth.

"They can also otherwise": Semler, Oberthür.

¹¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Initium viarum suarum abest a Seml. Oberth. Mss. non habent, inquit Junius, et abesse potest, etc.

"The beginning of his ways" is absent from Semler and Oberthür. The manuscripts do not have it, says Junius, and it can be left out, etc.

¹² ‹anchor: Scriptura inscripsisset› · call in col 239 Instruxisset, Seml. Oberth.

Instruxisset ("would have furnished"): Semler, Oberthür.

¹³ ‹anchor: erat initium viarum› · call in col 239 Disponendo jam fecerat; et sic erat initium viarum, quia cogitatio et dispositio prima Sophiae sit operatio, de cogitatu viam operibus instituens. Hanc exinde auctoritatem, etc. Ita legit Junius et lectionem suam pluribus verbis defendit.

"By disposing he had already made; and so it was the beginning of the ways, since thinking and disposing is the first working of Sophia, from thought laying out a way for the works. This authority from there," etc. So Junius reads, and defends his reading at some length.

¹⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Adhibebo Seml. Oberth.

Adhibebo ("I shall apply"): Semler, Oberthür.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 124)

(41) ‹anchor: Nam et in Graeco principii vocabulum, quod est ἀρχή› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 124) (41) Nam et in Graeco principii vocabulum, quod est ἀρχή. Consentiunt etiam Tertulliano in significatione ἀρχή pro principatu, Xenophon. lib. 1 de Imperio, Aristoteles, Politic. I, et Plato, de Republica. Pam.

For in Greek too the word for "beginning," which is archē. In the meaning of archē as "rule," Xenophon, book 1 On Government, Aristotle, Politics 1, and Plato, Republic, also agree with Tertullian. Pamelius.

(printed under page 124)

(42) ‹anchor: Unde et ἄρχοντας dicunt principes et magistratus› · call not visible

(printed under page 124) (42) Unde et ἄρχοντας dicunt principes et magistratus. Hoc adnotatu dignum, quod ubi graece est ἄρχοντες, eam vocem in translatione Scripturarum retinere soleat auctor: sicuti supra adv. Judaeos, cap. 9, et infra, lib. III adv. Marc. « Nam et ἄρχοντας, (inquit, Isaiam citans, cap. I) Sodomorum appellat archontas vestros. » Item lib. de Resurrectione carnis, cap. 50, alium locum Isaiae III, sic vertit: « Venturum in judicium presbyteris et archontibus populi. » Pam. — Archontas dicunt principes et magistr. Non potuit vir antiquitatis peritus non emittere hoc verbum de Atheniensium regimine; apud hos enim moriente Codro exstincta est regum successio, resque publica commissa fuit praetoribus primum perpetuis, seu magistratibus qui archontes appellati sunt numero 13. Creati postea decennales septem, ac demum annui constituti sunt. Primus archon fuit Medon, ut narrat Pausanias in Achaicis, qui cum pede altero esset debilis, frater ejus Neleus principem illum creari Athenis non posse sustinuit. Quod cum ad Apollinem delatum esset, secundum Medontem pronuntiavit. Le Pr.

Whence they call princes and magistrates archontes. It is worth noting that where the Greek has archontes, the author usually keeps that word in translating the Scriptures: as above, Against the Jews, chapter 9, and below, Against Marcion book 3: "For he calls your archontes (he says, citing Isaiah chapter 1) archons of Sodom." Likewise in the book On the Resurrection of the Flesh, chapter 50, he renders another passage, Isaiah 3, thus: "He will come into judgement with the elders and the archons of the people." Pamelius. — They call princes and magistrates archons. A man learned in antiquity could not but let fall this word about the government of the Athenians; for among them, at the death of Codrus, the succession of kings came to an end, and the commonwealth was entrusted first to praetors for life, or magistrates called archons, thirteen in number. Afterwards seven were created for ten-year terms, and at last they were made annual. The first archon was Medon, as Pausanias relates in the Achaica; since he was lame in one foot, his brother Neleus contended that he could not be made ruler at Athens. When this was referred to Apollo, he gave judgement in Medon's favour. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 124)

(34) ‹anchor: In principio erat Sermo› · call not visible (printed "(34)", in sequence for 43)

(printed under page 124) (34) In principio erat Sermo, etc. Non solum auctori istud et B. Cypriano usitatum fuit, ut sermo Dei potius quam Verbum Dei appellaretur Filius. Hinc illud lib. II Testimon. adversus Jud., c. 3: « Quod Christus idem sit Sermo Dei, » ubi id probat ex variis Scripturis. Pam.

In the beginning was the Discourse, etc. It was customary not only for the author but also for blessed Cyprian to call the Son the Sermo of God rather than the Verbum of God. Hence that heading in book 2 of the Testimonies against the Jews, chapter 3: "That Christ is likewise the Sermo of God," where he proves it from various Scriptures. Pamelius.

(printed under page 124) (44) Ne diversa pars. Supra, « Unde et diversa pars suspiciones suas fideive conatur. » Rig.

Lest the opposing side. Above: "Whence the opposing side too attempts its suspicions, or its faith." Rigault.

(printed under page 124)

Page

running head: 239 TERTULLIANI OPERUM PARS II
marginal letters: A mus et mentionem ipsius rei specialiter; B pro principatu et potestate sumetur; C fecisset. De Sophia autem potuit dici; D (41) Nam et in Graeco principii vocabulum (beside the commentary at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: 215 after substantiarum

PL 2:240

Deus qui fecit, et ea quae fecit ostendeus, unde fecerit non proinde testatur. Nam cum in omni operatione tria sint principalia: qui facit, et quod fit, et ex quo fit; tria nomina sunt edenda in legitima operis enarratione: persona factoris, species facti, forma materiae. Si materia non edetur, ubi et opera et operator edentur, apparet ex nihilo eum operatum. Proinde enim edetur ex quo, si ex aliquo fuisset operatus. Denique Evangelium ut supplementum instrumenti veteris adhibendo, in quo vel eo magis debuerat ostendi Deus ex aliqua materia universa fecisse, quod illic etiam per quem omnia fecerit revelatur: In principio erat Sermo, in quo principio scilicet Deus fecit coelum et terram. Et Sermo erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Sermo. Omnia per ipsum facta sunt, et sine illo factum est nihil (Joan. I, 1-3). Cum igitur et hic manifestetur et factor, id est Deus: et facta, id est omnia: et per quem, id est sermo; nonne et unde omnia facta essent a Deo per sermonem, exegisset ordo profiteri, si ex aliquo facta essent? Ita quod non fuit, non potuit Scriptura profiteri. Et non profitendo satis probavit non fuisse, quia profiteretur si fuisset.

God, Who made [them], and showing the things which He made, does not likewise testify from what He made [them]. For since in every work there are three principal things: who makes, and what is made, and from what it is made, three names must be set forth in a proper account of a work: the person of the maker, the kind of the thing made, the form of the material. If the material is not set forth, where both the works and the worker are set forth, it is plain that He worked out of nothing. For the "from what" would likewise be set forth, if He had worked out of something. Finally, in bringing in the Gospel as a supplement to the old instrument, in which God ought all the more to have been shown to have made all things out of some material, because there it is revealed even through Whom He made all things: In the beginning was the Word, that is, in which beginning God made heaven and earth. And the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made (John 1:1–3). Since therefore here too are made manifest both the maker, that is, God, and the things made, that is, all things, and through whom, that is, the Word: would not the order [of the account] have required it to declare also from what all things had been made by God through the Word, if they had been made out of something? So what was not, Scripture could not declare. And by not declaring it, it has sufficiently proved that it was not, since it would declare it if it had been.

CAPUT XXI.

Chapter XXI.

Ergo, inquis, si tu ideo praejudicas ex nihilo facta omnia, quia non si manifeste relatum de materia praecedenti factum quid, vide ne diversa pars ideo contendat ex materia facta, quia proinde non aperte significatum sit, ex nihilo quid factum. Plane retorqueri quaedam facile possunt, non statim et ex aequo admitti, ubi diversitas causae est. Dico enim, etsi non aperte Scriptura pronuntiavit ex nihilo facta omnia, sicut nec ex materia, non tantam fuisse necessitatem aperte significandi de nihilo facta omnia, quanta esset, si ex materia facta fuissent. Quoniam quod fit ex nihilo, eo

Then, you say, if you prejudge that all things were made out of nothing for this reason, that it is not plainly related that anything was made from pre-existing material, see that the opposing party does not for that reason contend that they were made out of material, because it has likewise not been openly signified that anything was made out of nothing. Certainly some things can easily be turned back, [but they are] not at once and on equal terms to be admitted, where there is a difference of case. For I say that, even though Scripture did not openly declare that all things were made out of nothing, just as [it did] not [declare that they were made] out of material, there was not so great a necessity of openly signifying that all things were made out of nothing as there would have been if they had been made out of material. Since what is made out of nothing, by that

Editors' notes and page, col. 240

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ¹⁴ ‹anchor: adhibendo› · call in col 240 Adhibebo Seml. Oberth.

Adhibebo ("I shall bring in"): Semler, Oberthür.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (42, end) ‹anchor: note (42), called in col 239› · continuation printed at the head of the right Commentarius column under page 124 (printed under page 124) … successio, resque publica commissa fuit praetoribus primum perpetuis, seu magistratibus qui archontes appellati sunt numero 13. Creati postea decennales septem, ac demum annui constituti sunt. Primus archon fuit Medon, ut narrat Pausanias in Achaicis, qui cum pede altero esset debilis, frater ejus Neleus principem illum creari Athenis non posse sustinuit. Quod cum ad Apollinem delatum esset, secundum Medontem pronuntiavit. Le Pr.

… succession, and the commonwealth was entrusted first to perpetual praetors, or magistrates, who were called archons, thirteen in number. Afterwards seven decennial ones were created, and at last annual ones were established. The first archon was Medon, as Pausanias relates in the Achaica; since he was lame in one foot, his brother Neleus could not bear that he be made prince at Athens. When this had been referred to Apollo, he pronounced in Medon's favour. Le Prieur.

(43) ‹anchor: In principio erat Sermo› · call in col 240 (printed "(43)" in the text; the note is numbered "(34)" at the foot, a misprint kept as printed)

(printed under page 124) (34) In principio erat Sermo, etc. Non solum auctori istud et B. Cypriano usitatum fuit, ut sermo Dei potius quam Verbum Dei appellaretur Filius. Hinc illud lib. II Testimon. adversus Jud., c. 3: « Quod Christus idem sit Sermo Dei, » ubi id probat ex variis Scripturis. Pam.

In the beginning was the Word, etc. It was customary not only for the author but also for Blessed Cyprian that the Son should be called the Sermo of God rather than the Verbum of God. Hence that [heading] in book II of the Testimonia against the Jews, c. 3: "That Christ is the same as the Sermo of God," where he proves it from various Scriptures. Pamelius.

(44) ‹anchor: vide› · call in col 240

(printed under page 124) (44) Ne diversa pars. Supra, « Unde et diversa pars suspiciones suas fideive conatur. » Rig.

Lest the opposing party. Above: "Whence also the opposing party attempts [to support] its suspicions or faith." Rigault.

Misprints kept as printed

- ostendeus (for ostendens), col 240, line 1 of the column; read so on the page at this resolution (Q1a: UNSURE whether a misprint or a broken n).

Page

running head: [cut at left edge] …PERUM PARS II. — SERIES I, POLEMICA. 240
marginal letters: A ‹Deus qui fecit, et ea quae fecit›; B ‹nia per ipsum facta sunt›; C ‹de non aperte significatum sit›; D ‹successio, resque publica (Commentarius)›
old-edition numerals: 246 after ‹instrumenti›
other: the Commentarius text (end of (42), (34)[=43], (44)) had been set in parts/c240_a.md as if text; moved here by Q1a, since the foot apparatus stays with the notes.

PL 2:241

ipso dum non ostenditur ex aliquo actum, manifestatur ex nihilo factum: et non periclitatur ne ex aliquo factum existimetur, quando non demonstretur ex quo sit factum. Quod autem ex aliquo fit, nisi hoc ipsum aperte declaratur ex aliquo factum, dum illud ex quo factum sit non ostenditur, periclitabitur primo videri ex nihilo factum, quia non editur ex quo sit factum. Dehinc, etsi ea sit conditione, ut non possit videri non ex aliquo, proinde periclitabitur, ex alio longe factum videri, quam ex quo factum est, dum non proponitur unde sit factum. Ita, si ex nihilo Deus cuncta fecisse non potuit, etsi Scriptura non adjecisse illum ex nihilo fecisse (II Mach. VII, 28): ex materia eum fecisse omni modo debuit edixisse, si et ex materia fecisset, quia illud in totum habebat intelligi, etsi non significaretur: at istud in dubio, nisi significaretur.

very fact that it is not shown to have been made from something, it is made manifest that it was made from nothing; and there is no risk that it be thought made from something, when it is not demonstrated from what it was made. But what is made from something, unless this very point is openly declared, that it was made from something, while that from which it was made is not shown, will run the risk first of seeming made from nothing, because it is not stated from what it was made. Next, even if it be of such a condition that it cannot seem to be not from something, it will likewise run the risk of seeming made from something far other than that from which it was made, so long as it is not set forth whence it was made. Thus, if God could not have made all things from nothing, even if Scripture [is held] not to have added that He made [them] from nothing (2 Macc. 7:28), it ought by all means to have proclaimed that He made [them] from matter, if He had indeed made [them] from matter, because the former could be wholly understood even if it were not signified, but the latter [would remain] in doubt unless it were signified.

CAPUT XXII.

Chapter XXII.

Atque adeo Spiritus sanctus hanc Scripturae suae rationem constituit, ut cum quid ex aliquo sit, et unde sit referat. Fruticet, inquit, terra herbam faeni, seminantem semen secundum genus et secundum similitudinem, et lignum fructuosum faciens fructum, cujus semen in ipso in similitudinem. Et factum est sic. Et produxit terra herbam faeni seminantem semen secundum genus, et lignum fructuosum faciens fructum, cujus semen in ipso in similitudinem Et rursus: Et dixit Deus: Producant aquae repentia animarum vivarum, et volatilia volantia super terram per firmamentum coeli. Et factum est sic. Et fecit Deus cetos magnos, et omnem animam animalium repentium, quae produxerunt aquae secundum genus ipsorum. Item post haec: Et dixit

And so the Holy Spirit has established this rule for His Scripture, that when something is from something, it also reports whence it is. Let the earth, He says, sprout the herb of grass, sowing seed according to kind and according to likeness, and fruitful wood bearing fruit, whose seed is in itself after its likeness. And it was done so. And the earth brought forth the herb of grass sowing seed according to kind, and fruitful wood bearing fruit, whose seed is in itself after its likeness. And again: And God said: Let the waters bring forth creeping things of living souls, and flying things flying above the earth through the firmament of heaven. And it was done so. And God made great sea-monsters, and every soul of creeping animals, which the waters brought forth according to their kind. Likewise after these things: And said

Editors' notes and page, col. 241

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ¹⁵ ‹anchor: non ostenditur› · call in col 241 Non deest Rhen. Seml. Obert.

Non ("not") is missing in Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

¹⁶ ‹anchor: non ex aliquo› · call in col 241 Videri ex aliquo Seml. Obert. Jun. leg. ut nunc possit videri ex aliquo.

Videri ex aliquo ("seem from something"): Semler, Oberthür. Junius reads ut nunc possit videri ex aliquo ("so that it can now seem from something").

¹⁷ ‹anchor: etsi› · call in col 241 Etsi deest Seml. Oberth.

Etsi ("even if") is missing in Semler, Oberthür.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses)

(45) ‹anchor: Et non periclitatur ne ex aliquo› · call in col 241

(printed under page 125) (45) Et non periclitatur ne ex aliquo, etc. Hanc locutionem per verbum periclitor etiam alibi usurpat, imitatione Graecorum, qui verbo κινδυνεύω sic utuntur. Non periclitatur, hoc est, abest, non est periculum. Rhen.

And there is no risk that from something, etc. He uses this turn of phrase with the verb periclitor elsewhere too, in imitation of the Greeks, who use the verb kindyneuō in this way. "There is no risk," that is: it is out of the question, there is no danger. Rhenanus.

(printed under page 125)

(46) ‹anchor: Fruticet, inquit, terra, herbam› · call in col 241

(printed under page 125) (46) Fruticet, inquit, terra, herbam, etc. Sic iterum legimus tum hic, tum infra c. 29, ex admonitione Latinii, pro eo quod Rhenanus substituerat, fructificet, idque eo magis, quod vox Graeca βλαστησάτω germinare et fructicare significet non fructificare, quomodo etiam voces Hebraea et Chaldaea. Rectius autem vertit auctor lignum fructuosum, pro eo quod Graece est κάρπιμον, quam Latinus LXX interpres pomiferum. Pam.

Let the earth, He says, sprout grass, etc. So we read it again, both here and below in chapter 29, on Latinius's advice, in place of what Rhenanus had substituted, fructificet ("let it bear fruit"); and all the more because the Greek word blastēsatō means to bud and sprout, not to bear fruit, as do the Hebrew and Chaldee words too. And the author renders kárpimon in the Greek more correctly as fruitful tree than the Latin translator of the Septuagint, who has fruit-bearing. Pamelius.

(printed under page 125)

(47) ‹anchor: aquae repentia› · call in col 241

(printed under page 125) (47) Producant aquae repentia. Putavit sine dubio melius reddi repentia ἑρπετά quam reptilia, ut codex vulgatus, quanquam melius putarem reptilia. Le Pr.

Let the waters bring forth creeping things. He no doubt thought herpetá better rendered repentia than reptilia, as the common text has, though I should think reptilia better. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 125)

(48) ‹anchor: De coelo et de terra› · call not visible

(printed under page 125) (48) De coelo et de terra, etc. Id est Spiritus sanctus, qui coeli arcana nos docebat, monuisset de coelo a quo res creatae fuissent. Idem quoque Spiritus docuisset de terra ex qua crearentur: sicque nos de coelo et de terra compotes reddidisset. Le Pr.

About heaven and about earth, etc. That is, the Holy Spirit, who was teaching us the secrets of heaven, would have told us about heaven, from what things had been created. The same Spirit too would have taught about the earth, out of what they were being created; and so would have made us masters of [the knowledge of] heaven and earth. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 125)

(49) ‹anchor: Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem› · call not visible

(printed under page 125) (49) Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem. Venerationem aliquam tribuisse sacro textui auctorem hunc, nullum puto fore qui neget, quaedam tamen principia de suo in explicanda Scriptura jacit a quibus cavendum. Le Pr.

I adore the fullness of Scripture. That this author paid a certain veneration to the sacred text, I think no one will deny; yet in explaining Scripture he lays down some principles of his own which are to be guarded against. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 125)

(50) ‹anchor: Arbitrum rectoris invenio sermonem› · call not visible

(printed under page 125) (50) Arbitrum rectoris invenio sermonem. Scribendum, ut est in codiee Divionensi: « Arbitrum factoris invenio sermonem. » Rig.

I find the Word the arbiter of the ruler. It should be written, as it is in the Dijon codex [printed codiee]: "I find the Word the arbiter of the maker." Rigault.

(printed under page 125) (51) Vae illud adjicientibus, etc. Sacrae Scripturae addere vel detrahere summa esset audacia. Verum illius interpretatio, non ex homuncionum cerebro, sed ex Ecclesiae placitis et SS. Patrum lucubrationibus tantum eruenda est. Quod adjicio, ut haereticorum proterviae obvius occurram, qui ex hoc loco aliquid eruere posse crederent ad fatuitatum subsidium. Le Pr.

That woe upon those who add, etc. To add to Sacred Scripture or take from it would be the height of audacity. But its interpretation is to be drawn out not from the brains of little men, but only from the decrees of the Church and the studies of the holy Fathers. I add this to meet head-on the insolence of the heretics, who might think they could draw something out of this passage in support of their follies. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 125) (52) Nam et terrae nomen. Propius hic Hermogenis errorem tangit, cujus originem ex eo fuisse docet, quod per terrae nomen materiam designari crederet. Le Pr.

For the name "earth" too. Here he touches Hermogenes' error more closely, teaching that it arose from his believing that matter was designated by the name earth. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 125) (53) Invisibilis autem et rudis. Dixerat modo, incomposita, pro eo quod est in Graeca, ἀκατασκεύαστος, hic rudis dicitur, ut Ovidio Metamorph. — Rudis indigestaque moles. Le Pr.

Invisible, however, and rough. He had just said unformed, for what is in the Greek akataskeúastos; here it is called rough, as in Ovid, Metamorphoses: "a rough and unordered mass." Le Prieur.

(printed under page 125)

Misprints kept as printed

- fructicare (for fruticare), Commentarius (46).

Page

running head: 241 LIBER ADV. HERMOGE (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ipso dum non ostenditur; B fecisset, quia illud in totum; C pentia animarum vivarum; D rum legimus tum hic (in the Commentarius)
old-edition numerals: 217 after unde
other: ligature doubt raised by the check (text not changed): firmamentum coeli | firmamentum caeli
other (Q1a): faeni (twice) left as set; the italic ligature (æ or œ) is not certain at this resolution (UNSURE).

PL 2:242

Deus : Producat terra animam viventem secundum genus quadrupedia et repentia et bestias terrae, secundum genus ipsorum (Gen. I,11 seqq.). Si ergo ex jam factis rebus, alias res Deus proferens, ostendit per prophetam, et dicit quid unde protulerit (quanquam possimus unde illas prolatas aestimare, dum ne ex nihilo; jam enim facta erant quaedam, ex quibus prolatae videri possent): si tantam curam instructionis nostrae insumpsit Spiritus sanctus, ut sciremus quid unde processerit, nonne proinde nos et de coelo et de terra compotes reddidisset, significando unde ea esset operatus, si de aliqua materia origo constaret illorum? ut tanto magis ex nihilo ea videretur operatus, quanto nihil adhuc erat factum, ex quo operatus videretur. Itaque sicut ea quae de aliquo prolata sunt, ostendit unde prolata sint: ita quae non ostendit unde prolata sint, ex nihilo prolata confirmat. Igitur in principio Deus fecit caelum et terram. Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem, qua mihi et factorem manifestat et facta. In Evangelio vero amplius et ministrum atque arbitrum rectoris invenio sermonem. An autem de aliqua subjacenti materia facta sint omnia, nusquam adhuc legi. Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis officina. Si non est scriptum, timeat vae illud, adjicientibus aut detrahentibus destinatum (Apoc. XXII, 18, 19).

God: Let the earth bring forth the living soul according to kind, four-footed creatures and creeping things and beasts of the earth, according to their kind (Gen. 1:11 ff.). If, then, God, bringing forth other things out of things already made, shows through the prophet and says what He brought forth from what (although we could judge from what those things were brought forth, provided it was not from nothing; for certain things had already been made, from which they could be seen to have been brought forth): if the Holy Spirit took upon Himself such care for our instruction that we should know what proceeded from what, would He not likewise have made us informed about both heaven and earth, by signifying from what He had wrought them, if their origin were established from some matter? so that He might seem to have wrought them out of nothing all the more, inasmuch as nothing had yet been made out of which He might seem to have wrought them. Therefore, just as He shows from what those things were brought forth which were brought forth from something, so the things of which He does not show from what they were brought forth, He confirms to have been brought forth from nothing. Therefore, In the beginning God made heaven and earth. I adore the fullness of Scripture, by which it manifests to me both the Maker and the things made. In the Gospel, moreover, I find besides the Word as minister and arbiter of the Ruler. But whether all things were made from some underlying matter, I have nowhere yet read. Let the workshop of Hermogenes teach that it is written. If it is not written, let it fear that woe destined for those who add or take away (Rev. 22:18–19).

CAPUT XXIII.

Chapter XXIII.

Sed ex sequentibus argumentatur, quia scriptum sit: Terra autem erat invisibilis et incomposita. Nam et terrae nomen redigit in materiam, quia terra sit quae facta est ex illa. Et erat in hoc dirigit, quasi quae semper retro fuerit innata et infecta. Invisibilis autem et rudis, quia informem et

But he argues from what follows, because it is written: But the earth was invisible and unformed. For he also reduces the name of earth to matter, because the earth is what was made out of it. And he directs "was" to this end, as though it had always in the past been unborn and unmade. Invisible, moreover, and rude, because shapeless and

Editors' notes and page, col. 242

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ¹⁵ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Non deest Rhen. Seml. Obert.

Non ("not") is missing in Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

¹⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Videri ex aliquo Seml. Obert. Jun. leg. ut nunc possit videri ex aliquo.

"To seem [to be] from something": Semler, Oberthür. Junius reads "so that now it could seem [to be] from something."

¹⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Etsi deest Seml. Oberth.

Etsi ("even if") is missing in Semler, Oberthür.

¹⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Licet ex Seml. Oberth.

"Although from": Semler, Oberthür.

¹⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Fructificet Seml. Oberth.

Fructificet ("let it bear fruit"): Semler, Oberthür.

²⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Unde unde Rig. Wouw. Lat.

Unde unde ("from wherever"): Rigault, Wouwer, the Latin [editions].

²¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Existimare Rig. e cod. Divion.

Existimare ("to judge"): Rigault, from the Dijon codex.

²² ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Quae omnes alii, teste Jun.

Quae ("which"): all the others, on the witness of Junius.

²³ ‹anchor: Nam et terrae› · call in col 242 Et in terrae Rhen. conjicit.

Et in terrae ("and in [the name] of earth"): Rhenanus's conjecture.

²⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible In deest Fran. Paris. Rig.

In is missing in the Franeker and Paris editions and Rigault.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 125)

(51) ‹anchor: adjicientibus› · call in col 242

(printed under page 125)

(52) ‹anchor: terrae nomen› · call in col 242

(printed under page 125)

(53) ‹anchor: Invisibilis autem et rudis› · call in col 242

(printed under page 125)

Page

running head: ADV. HERMOGENEM.
marginal letters: A ‹Deus : Producat terra animam›; B ‹operatus videretur. Itaque›; C ‹sit : Terra autem erat›; D ‹bendum, ut est in codiee› (beside editors' note 50)
old-edition numerals: 218 after ‹adhuc›

PL 2:243

confusam et inconditam vult fuisse materiam. Has quidem opiniones ejus sigillatim revincam, sed interim volo sic ei respondere. Putamus his articulis materiam demonstrari. Numquid tamen, quia erat ante omnia, et tale aliquid esse ex ea factum Scriptura significat? Atquin nihil tale significat. Fuerit licet materia, quantum sibi licet, vel potius Hermogeni: potuit et fuisse, et tamen nihil Deus ex illa fecisse, vel quia non decebat Deum alicujus eguisse, certe quia nec ostenditur quicquam ex materia fecisse. Sine causa ergo esset, inquis. Non plane adeo sine causa. Nam etsi mundus non est factus ex illa, sed haeresis facta est, et quidem hoc impudentior, quod non ex materia facta est haeresis, sed materiam ipsam potius haeresis fecit.

confused and unordered he wants matter to have been. These opinions of his I shall indeed refute one by one, but meanwhile I wish to answer him thus. We suppose that matter is indicated by these phrases. Yet does Scripture indicate, because it existed before all things, that anything of the kind was also made from it? But it indicates nothing of the kind. Granted that matter existed, as far as is permitted to it, or rather to Hermogenes: it could both have existed and yet God have made nothing from it, either because it did not befit God to have needed anything, or certainly because He is not shown to have made anything from matter. "Then it would exist without purpose," you say. Not wholly without purpose. For even if the world was not made from it, yet a heresy was made, and indeed all the more impudent in this, that the heresy was not made out of matter, but rather the heresy made matter itself.

CAPUT XXIV.

Chapter XXIV.

Revertor nunc ad singulos articulos, per quos putavit significatam esse materiam. Et primo de nominibus expostulabo. Horum enim alterum legimus, quod est terrae: alterum non invenimus quod est materiae. Quaero ergo, cum materiae nominatio non exstet in Scriptura, quomodo ei etiam terrae appellatio accommodetur in alio jam genere substantiae nota? Quo magis materiae quoque nominatio exstitisse debuerat, consecuta etiam terrae appellationem, ut scirem terram commune cum materia esse nomen, ne illud ei soli substantiae vindicarem, cujus et proprium, in qua magis notum est, vel ne illud in quamcumque aliam speciem, nec utique omni materiae communicare possem, si vellem. Cum enim non extat proprium vocabulum ejus rei cui communo vocabulum adscribitur, quanto non comparet cui adscribatur, cuicunque alii poterit adscribi. Ita Hermogenes, etsi materiam ostenderet nominatam, deberet eamdem probare terram quoque cognominatam, ut ita utrumque illi vocabulum vindicaret.

I return now to the individual phrases through which he thought matter was signified. And first I shall raise a complaint about the names. For of these we read the one, which is "earth"; the other, which is "matter", we do not find. I ask, therefore, since the naming of matter does not exist in Scripture, how the appellation "earth" is also applied to it, being already known in another kind of substance? All the more ought the naming of matter also to have existed, following on the appellation "earth" as well, so that I might know that "earth" is a name shared with matter, lest I should claim it for that substance alone whose proper [name] it also is, in which it is better known, or lest I should be able to share it with any other species whatever, nor indeed with all matter, if I wished. For when the proper word of the thing to which a common word is ascribed does not exist, inasmuch as it does not appear to what it is ascribed, it can be ascribed to anything else whatever. Thus Hermogenes, even if he were showing matter to be named, ought to prove that the same was also called by the name "earth", so that he might thus claim both words for it.

CAPUT XXV.

Chapter XXV.

Vult igitur duas proponi terras in ista Scriptura: unam, quam in principio Deus fecit; aliam, materiam,

He wants, therefore, two earths to be set forth in this Scripture: one, which God made in the beginning; the other, matter,

Editors' notes and page, col. 243

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ²⁵ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Sigillatim alii.

Sigillatim ("one by one"): others.

²⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Putemus conjicit Jun.

Putemus ("let us suppose"): Junius's conjecture.

²⁷ ‹anchor: magis notum est› · call in col 243 Notum est Oberth. Seml. post Rhen. sane suspicantem legendum esse: notum est.

Notum est ("it is known"): Oberthür, Semler, following Rhenanus, who indeed suspected that notum est should be read.

²⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Omittitur debeat apud Seml. et Oberth. qui addunt id. Junius legit: ex duobus, quae cui nomen terrae accommodari debeat.

Debeat ("ought") is omitted in Semler and Oberthür, who add id ("it"). Junius reads: "of the two, which of them the name 'earth' ought to be fitted to."

²⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Ea de nomine Seml. Oberth.

"Those things about the name": Semler, Oberthür.

³⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Et status sui Lat.

"And of its own state": the Latin [editions].

³¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Ex terra Seml. Oberth.

"From earth": Semler, Oberthür.

³² ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Non audio Pamel. Parisin. Franeq. non a Deo Rigalt. Semler. Oberth.

"I do not hear": Pamelius, the Paris and Franeker editions; "not by God": Rigault, Semler, Oberthür.

³³ ‹anchor: a cujus habitu quid› · call in col 244 Quid Par. Fran. Rig. At Jun. qui. Seml. quod.

Quid ("what"): Paris and Franeker editions, Rigault. But Junius: qui. Semler: quod.

³⁴ ‹anchor: in quo materia› · call in col 244 Materiam Seml.

Materiam (accusative): Semler.

³⁵ ‹anchor: deinde› · call in col 244 De hinc Rhen. Seml.

De hinc ("thereafter"): Rhenanus, Semler.

³⁶ ‹anchor: nisi et› · call in col 244 Nisi si addit Rhen. Seml.

Nisi si ("unless if"): added by Rhenanus, Semler.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 126) (54) Jam non argillam vocabo, sed testam, Et enim ignis argillae nomen excussit. Rig.

I shall no longer call it clay but earthenware. For the fire has knocked the name "clay" out of it. Rigault.

(printed under page 126) (55) Et electrum licet ex auro et argento foederatum. Conflati utriusque metalli confusione, Plinius, lib. IX. 40: Nec habent finem vitia, juvatque ludere impendio, et luxus geminare miscendo, iterumque et ipsa adulterare adulteria naturae; sicut argentum auro confundere, ut electra fiant; addere his aera, ut Corinthia. » Idem ait, ubicumque quinta argenti portio est, electrum vocari. Rig.

And electrum, though compounded of gold and silver. [Electrum is] of both metals fused and blended. Pliny, book 9.40: "Nor do the vices have an end; it pleases them to play with expense, to double luxuries by mixing them, and again to adulterate nature's adulterations themselves; as to blend silver with gold so that electrums are made; to add copper to these, so as to make Corinthian ware." The same says that wherever there is a fifth part of silver, it is called electrum. Rigault.

(printed under page 126) (56) Nec argentum tamen nec aurum appellabo, sed electrum. Etenim fit species novi corporis, ut ait Caius, lib. VII de Acquis. rer. dom. Fit tertium quid, ex utroque confusum. Sic lib. adversus Praxeam. Rig. — Sed electrum, Plinius, lib. XXXIII Hist. nat. IV: « Omni auro inest argentum: ubicunque quinta argenti portio est, electrum vocatur. Fit et cura electrum argento addito; quod si quintam portionem excessit, incudibus non resistit. » Pam.

Yet I shall call it neither silver nor gold, but electrum. For a form of a new body comes into being, as Gaius says, book 7, On the Acquisition of Ownership of Things. A third something comes into being, blended from both. So in the book Against Praxeas. Rigault. — But electrum, Pliny, Natural History book 33.4: "All gold contains silver: wherever the silver amounts to a fifth part, it is called electrum. Electrum is also made artificially by adding silver; and if it exceeds a fifth part, it does not stand up to the anvil." Pamelius.

(printed under page 126) (57) Nisi et Sileno illi apud Midam, etc. Simile est illud supra cap. 2, lib. de Pallio; « Viderit si quis uspiam alius (orbis nempe), ad Meropas, ut Silenus penes aures Midae blattit, aptas sane grandioribus fabulis; » et quod habet Maximus Tyrius serm, 30 (si modo recte citatur a Gyraldo de Diis Gentium), « Silenum ebrium laqueis et vinculis (continues)

Unless also to that Silenus at Midas's court, etc. Like this is the passage above, chapter 2 of the book On the Pallium: "Let him look to it if there is any other [world] anywhere, among the Meropes, as Silenus prattles in Midas's ears, which were surely fit for taller tales"; and what Maximus of Tyre has in discourse 30 (if only he is rightly cited by Gyraldus, On the Gods of the Gentiles): "Silenus, drunk, with snares and bonds (continues)

(printed under page 126)

Page

running head: 243 TERTULLIANI OPERUM PARS II. —
marginal letters: A ‹confusam et inconditam vult›; B ‹CAPUT XXIV.›; C ‹sem, si vellem. Cum enim non extat›; D ‹(54) Jam non argillam vocabo (in the Commentarius notes, not set)›
old-edition numerals: 219 before Revertor (head of paragraph after CAPUT XXIV.)

PL 2:244

ex qua fecit, de qua dictum sit: Terra autem erat invisibilis et rudis. Utique si quaeram ex duabus quae, cui nomen terrae accommodare debeat, dicetur, hanc quae facta sit ex illa ex qua facta est, vocabulum derivasse, quia verisimilius sit ab origine sobolem potius, quam originem a sobole vocitari. Hoc si ita est, alia nobis obvolvitur quaestio, an competat terram hanc quam Deus fecit, ex illa ex qua fecit cognomentum derivasse. Audio enim apud Hermogenem caeterosque materiarios haereticos, terram quidem illam informem et invisibilem et rudem fuisse: hanc vero nostram proinde et formam, et conspectum, et cultum, a Deo consecutam. Aliud ergo factam quam erat ex ea qua facta est. Porro aliud facta, non potuit cum ea denominatione sociari, a cujus conditione desciverat. Si nomen proprium materiae illius fuit terra, haec quae non est materia, aliud scilicet facta, terrae quoque non capit nomen alienum, et statu suo extraneum. Sed materia facta, id est terra, habuit cum sua origine consortium nominis, sicut et generis. Non adeo. Nam et testam, licet ex argilla confectam, jam non argillam vocabo, sed testam: et electrum, licet ex auro et argento foederatum nec argentum tamen nec aurum appellabo, sed electrum: a cujus habitu quid divertit, pariter et a vocatu ejus recedit, appellationis, sicut et conditionis proprietate. Quam autem transierit de statu terrae illius, id est materiae, ista terra, vel eo palam est, quod haec apud Genesim testimonium boni accipit: Et vidit Deus quia bonum: illa autem apud Hermogenem in originem et causam malorum deputatur. Postremo, si ideo haec terra, quia et illa, cur non et materia haec quoque, quia illa? Imo jam et coelum et omnia, si ex materia constant, et terrae et materiae vocari debuerunt. Satis ista de terrae nomine (in quo materia intelligi voluit) quod nomen unius elementi omnes sciunt, natura primum, deinde Scriptura docente, nisi et Sileno illi apud Midam

from which He made [it], of which it was said: But the earth was invisible and unformed. Certainly, if I were to ask which of the two ought to accommodate the name of earth to which, it will be said that this one, which was made, derived the term from that one from which it was made, because it is more probable that the offspring should be called after the origin than the origin after the offspring. If this is so, another question is wrapped around us: whether it is fitting that this earth which God made derived its name from that from which He made it. For I hear among Hermogenes and the other materialist heretics that that earth was indeed formless and invisible and unformed, but that this earth of ours, by contrast, obtained form and appearance and adornment from God. Therefore it was made something other than what that was from which it was made. Moreover, having been made something other, it could not be joined with that designation from whose condition it had departed. If the proper name of that matter was earth, this one, which is not matter, having namely been made something other, also does not admit the name of earth, a name foreign to it and alien to its state. But, [it is said,] matter having been made, that is, earth, had with its origin a partnership of name, just as of kind. Not so. For a potsherd too, although made from clay, I shall no longer call clay but a potsherd; and electrum, although compounded of gold and silver, I shall nevertheless call neither silver nor gold, but electrum: whatever departs from the character of a thing likewise withdraws also from its appellation, in the property of naming as of condition. But how far this earth has passed from the state of that earth, that is, of matter, is plain even from this, that this one in Genesis receives the testimony of good: And God saw that it was good; whereas that one, with Hermogenes, is reckoned as the origin and cause of evils. Lastly, if this is earth because that one is too, why is this not also matter, because that one is? Nay, then heaven too and all things, if they consist of matter, ought to have been called both earth and matter. Enough of these things concerning the name of earth (in which he wanted matter to be understood), which everyone knows to be the name of one element, nature teaching it first, then Scripture, unless also to that Silenus at the court of Midas

Editors' notes and page, col. 244

Footnotes

(54) ‹anchor: jam non argillam vocabo, sed testam› · call in col 244

(printed under page 126)

(55) ‹anchor: ex auro et argento foederatum› · call in col 244

(printed under page 126)

(56) ‹anchor: sed electrum› · call in col 244

(printed under page 126)

(57) ‹anchor: Sileno illi apud Midam› · call in col 244

(printed under page 126)

Page

running head: [cut off at left] UM PARS II. — SERIES I, POLEMICA. 244
marginal letters: A riam, ex qua fecit; B denominatione sociari; C Genesim testimonium boni; D quid, ex utroque confusum (in the Commentarius, not in the text)
old-edition numerals: 220 after fuisse:
other: column begins with fragment "riam" (materiam) broken from the previous column; ends mid-sentence at "Midam"; left-column fragments visible at the edge of the images not set; Variae lectiones and Commentarius at the page foot not set; running head cut off at its left edge

PL 2:245

regem asseveranti de alio orbe, credendum est, aucto⟨r⟩e Theopompo. Sed et deos multos idem ⟨r⟩efert.

the king, who asserts concerning another world, credence must be given, on the authority of Theopompus. But the same man also reports many gods.

CAPUT XXVI.

Chapter XXVI.

Nobis autem unus Deus et una est terra, quam in principio Deus fecit, cujus ordinem incipiens Scriptura decurrere, primo factam eam edicit, dehinc qualitatem ipsius edisserit, sicut et coelum primo factum professa: In principio fecit Deus coelum, dehinc dispositionem ejus superinducit: Et separavit inter aquam quae erat infra firmamentum (Gen. I, 7), et quae super firmamentum, et vocavit Deus firmamentum coelum, ipsum quod in primordio fecerat. Proinde et de homine: Et fecit Deus hominem: ad imaginem Dei fecit illum (Ibid. 27). Dehinc qualiter fecerit reddit: Et finxit Deus hominem de limo terrae, et afflavit in faciem ejus flatum vitae, et factus est homo in animam vivam (Gen. II. 7). Et utique sic decet narrationem inire, primo praefari, postea prosequi, nominare, deinde describere. Alioquin vanum, si ejus rei cujus nullam praemiserat mentionem, id est materiae, ne ipsum quidem nomen, subito formam et habitum promulgavit: ante enarrat qualis esset, quam an esset; ostendit figuram deformati; nomen abscondit. At quanto credibilius secundum nos ejus rei dispositionem Scriptura subjunxit, cujus institutionem simulque nominationem praemisit. Quam denique integer sensus est: In principio Deus fecit coelum et terram, terra autem erat invisibilis et rudis (Gen. II, 1, 2), quam Deus scilicet fecit, de qua Scriptura cum maxime ediderat. Nam et autem ipsum, velut fibula conjunctivae particulae ad connexum narrationi oppositum est, terra autem. Hoc enim verbo revertitur ad eam de qua supra dixerat, et alligat sensum. Adeo aufer hinc autem, et soluta compago est, ut tunc possit

But for us there is one God and there is one earth, which in the beginning God made; and Scripture, beginning to run through its order, first declares that it was made, then expounds its quality, just as also, having first professed that heaven was made, In the beginning God made heaven, it then brings in its arrangement: And He separated between the water which was below the firmament (Gen. 1:7), and that which was above the firmament, and God called the firmament heaven, the very thing which He had made in the beginning. Likewise also concerning man: And God made man: to the image of God He made him (ibid. 1:27). Then it relates how He made him: And God formed man from the slime of the earth, and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man was made into a living soul (Gen. 2:7). And certainly it is fitting to enter upon a narration thus: first to give a preface, afterwards to follow it up; to name, then to describe. Otherwise it is futile if, concerning a thing of which it had made no previous mention, that is, of matter, not even of the name itself, it suddenly published the form and condition: it relates of what sort it was before [saying] whether it was; it shows the figure of the thing deformed; it hides the name. But how much more credibly, according to us, did Scripture subjoin the arrangement of that thing whose institution and naming together it had set forth beforehand. How complete, in short, is the sense: In the beginning God made heaven and earth; but the earth was invisible and unformed (Gen. 1:1–2), that is, [the earth] which God made, about which Scripture had just then spoken. For the very word but, like the clasp of a conjunctive particle, is set for the connection of the narrative: but the earth. For by this word it returns to that of which it had spoken above, and binds the sense together. So take away but here, and the fastening is loosened, so that then it could

Editors' notes and page, col. 245

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ³⁷ ‹anchor: habitum promulgavit› · call in col 245 Habitum promulgavit ante: enarrat qualia esset, antequam an esset, ostendit: figuram deformat, nomen abscondit: Jun. ita legend. censet.

"He made known its condition beforehand: he relates what sort of thing it was before [saying] whether it was, he shows; he disfigures the figure, he hides the name": so Junius thinks it should be read.

³⁸ ‹anchor: cum maxime ediderat› · call in col 245 Edixerat Semler. Oberth.

Edixerat ("had declared"): Semler, Oberthür.

³⁹ ‹anchor: oppositum est› · call in col 245 Appositum Seml. Oberth.

Appositum ("placed beside"): Semler, Oberthür.

⁴⁰ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Supercilio Seml. Oberth. Supercilio et capitis nutu digitis accommodato Jun.

Supercilio ("with the eyebrow"): Semler, Oberthür. "With the eyebrow and a nod of the head, the fingers fitted to it": Junius.

⁴¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Et nutu Seml. Oberth. Pamel.

Et nutu ("and with a nod"): Semler, Oberthür, Pamelius.

⁴² ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Inquit Jun.

Inquit ("he says"): Junius.

⁴³ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Habet Seml. Habeat Fran.

Habet ("has"): Semler. Habeat ("may have"): the Franeker edition.

⁴⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Sine abest Seml.

Sine ("without") is absent in Semler.

⁴⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Relationis Jun.

Relationis ("of the relation"): Junius.

⁴⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible In quaestionem magnam Seml.

"Into a great question": Semler.

⁴⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Ita omnes. Suspicatur Hallensis legendum cujus ex quo erat.

So all. The Halle editor suspects that "of which, from which it was" should be read.

⁴⁸ ‹anchor: si nuda materia› · call in col 246 Si nuda sit materia, Deo Seml. Oberth. Si nuda sic Jun.

"If matter were bare, to God": Semler, Oberthür. "If bare thus": Junius.

⁴⁹ ‹anchor: et inconditam› · call in col 246 Inquietam Seml. Obert. Incultam suspic. Jun.

Inquietam ("restless"): Semler, Oberthür. Incultam ("untilled"): Junius's suspicion.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 127)

(58) ‹anchor: Auctore Theopompo› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 127) (58) Auctore Theopompo. Non unus fuit Theopompus: alter fuit historicus, alter poeta comicus qui fabulae cuipiam nomen Sileni dedit. An idem fuerit poeta et historicus incertum habeo. Tota autem illa Midae fabula ex Theopompo eruitur. Quanquam revera Silenus a Mida captus fuit in hortis amoenis quos in Macedonia habebat. Le Pr.

On Theopompus's authority. There was more than one Theopompus: one was a historian, the other a comic poet who gave the name Silenus to one of his plays. Whether poet and historian were the same man I hold uncertain. But that whole tale of Midas is drawn from Theopompus. Although in fact Silenus was captured by Midas in the pleasant gardens he had in Macedonia. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 127)

(59) ‹anchor: Et separavit inter aquam, quae erat infra firmamentum› · call not visible

(printed under page 127) (59) Et separavit inter aquam, quae erat infra firmamentum. Infra omnino hic accipit auctor, pro subter, aut sub, neque enim aliter accipi potest; quod graece est, ὃ ἦν ὑποκάτω τοῦ στερεώματος maxime cum illud Hebr. II, transferatur: Sub pedibus ejus, sicut hic ab aliis interpretibus: Sub firmamento. Pam.

And he divided between the water which was below the firmament. The author certainly takes infra here for subter or sub ("beneath, under"), for it cannot be taken otherwise; in Greek it is "which was beneath the firmament," especially since that in Hebrews 2 is rendered Under his feet, just as here other translators have Under the firmament. Pamelius.

(printed under page 127)

(60) ‹anchor: aufer hinc autem› · call in col 245

(printed under page 127) (60) Adeo aufer hinc autem, etc. Pulchra interpretatio, quid particula autem in Scripturis sacris addita significet. Adnotatur autem a Rhenano similis locus, ex lib. de Resurrect. carnis, infra, cap. 40: « Ita vocabulum, homo, consertarum substantiarum duarum quodammodo fibula est. » Pam.

So take away "however" from here, etc. A fine interpretation of what the particle autem signifies when added in the sacred Scriptures. Rhenanus notes a similar passage from the book On the Resurrection of the Flesh, below, chapter 40: "So the word man is in a way the clasp of two substances joined together." Pamelius.

(printed under page 127)

(61) ‹anchor: Sed tu supercilia capitis nutu digiti accommodato› · call not visible

(printed under page 127) (61) Sed tu supercilia capitis nutu digiti accommodato. In editionibus Rhenani et codice Divionensi legitur: « Sed tu supercilio capitis et nutu digiti accommodato, etc. » Rig.

But you, with eyebrows, a nod of the head, a finger fitted to it. In Rhenanus's editions and in the Dijon codex one reads: "But you, with the eyebrow, the head and a nod of the finger fitted to it, etc." Rigault.

(printed under page 127) (62) Aut si hoc a Deo revelatum est. Locus ad- (continues)

Or if this has been revealed by God. A passage (continues)

(printed under page 127)

Page

running head: 245 LIBER ADV. HERMOGE[NEM] (cut off at image edge)
marginal letters: A regem asseveranti; B Deus hominem : ad imaginem; C denique integer sensus est; D constrictum Midae (in the Commentarius)
old-edition numerals: 221 after primo
other: ligature doubt raised by the check (text not changed): fecit Deus coelum | fecit Deus caelum
other: ligature doubt raised by the check (text not changed): firmamentum coelum | firmamentum caelum
other: ligature doubt raised by the check (text not changed): fecit coelum et terram | fecit caelum et terram

PL 2:246

de alia terra dictum videri, Terra erat invisibilis et rudis.

seem to have been said of another earth: The earth was invisible and unformed.

CAPUT XXVII.

Chapter XXVII.

Sed tu supercilia capitis, nutu digiti accommodato, altius tollens, et quasi retro jactans: Erat, inquis, quasi semper fuerit, scilicet innata et infecta, et idcirco materia credenda. At ego sine ullo lenocinio pronuntiationis simpliciter respondebo, de omni re posse dici erat, etiam de ea quae facta, quae nata sit, quae aliquando non fuerit, et quae materia non sit. Omne enim quod habet esse, unde habeat, sive per initium, sive sine initio, hoc ipso quod est, etiam erat dicetur. Cui competit prima verbi positio in definitionem, ejusdem etiam declinatio verbi decurret in relationem. Est, definitionis caput; erat, relationi facit. Hae sunt argutiae et subtilitates haereticorum, simplicitatem communium verborum torquentes in quaestionem. Magna scilicet quaestio est, si erat terra, quae facta est. Sane discutiendum an ei competat invisibilem et rudem fuisse quae facta est, ut ejusdem sit erat, cujus et quod erat.

But you, raising the eyebrows of your head higher, with a gesture of the finger suited to it, and as it were throwing them back, say: "It was," as though it had always been, that is, unborn and unmade, and therefore to be believed to be matter. But I, without any allurement of delivery, shall reply simply that "was" can be said of every thing, even of that which has been made, which has been born, which at some time was not, and which is not matter. For everything that has being, from whatever source it has it, whether through a beginning or without a beginning, by this very fact that it is, will also be said "to have been". To whatever the first form of the verb belongs for definition, the inflection of the same verb will also run on to it for narration. "Is" is the head of definition; "was" serves narration. These are the quibbles and subtleties of heretics, twisting the simplicity of common words into a question. A great question, to be sure, whether the earth "was", which was made! Rather, it must be examined whether it befits that which was made to have been invisible and unformed, so that "was" belongs to the same thing to which "what it was" also belongs.

CAPUT XXVIII.

Chapter XXVIII.

Atquin non tantum probabimus istum habitum huic terrae competisse, sed et illi alii non competisse. Nam si nuda materia Deo subjacebat, nullo scilicet elemento obstruente, si quidem nondum quicquam erat praeter ipsam et Deum; utique invisibilis esse non poterat. Quia etsi tenebras volet in substantia fuisse materiae (cui articulo respondere debebimus suo ordine), etiam homini tenebrae visibiles sunt. Hoc enim ipsum quod sunt tenebrae, videtur, nedum Deo. Et utique si invisibilis essct, nullo modo cognosceretur qualitas ejus. Unde ergo compertus est Hermogenes informem et confusam et inconditam illam fuisse, quae ut invisibilis latebat: aut si hoc a Deo revelatum est, probare

And yet we shall prove not only that this condition befitted this earth, but also that it did not befit that other one. For if bare matter lay subject to God, with no element, that is, obstructing, since as yet there was nothing besides itself and God, it certainly could not be invisible. For even if he will have it that there was darkness in the substance of matter (a point to which we shall have to reply in its proper order), darkness is visible even to man. For this very fact that it is darkness is seen, much more so by God. And certainly, if it were invisible, its quality would in no way be known. Whence then did Hermogenes discover that it was formless and confused and disordered, which, being invisible, lay hidden? Or, if this has been revealed by God, to prove it

Editors' notes and page, col. 246

Footnotes

(62) ‹anchor: a Deo revelatum est› · call in col 246

(printed under page 127)

Page

running head: ADV. HBRMOGENEM. 246 (left part of the head cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹de alia terra dictum videri›; B ‹dem etiam declinatio verbi decurret›; C ‹sibilis esse non poterat. Quia etsi›; D ‹pro subter, aut sub, neque enim› (beside the commentary)
old-edition numerals: 222 after ‹hoc› (bold figures, UNSURE reading)
other: the word probare was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 247

PL 2:247

debet. Sic et an rudis dici potuerit, expostulo. Certe enim rude illud est quod imperfectum est. Certe imperfectum non potest esse, nisi quod factum est. Quod enim minus factum est, imperfectum est. Certe, inquis. Ergo materia quae facta non erat in totum imperfecta esse non potuit. Quae imperfecta non fuit, etiam rudis non fuit. Initium non habens quia facta non fuit, caruit et rudimento. Initii enim accidens est rudimentum. Terra vero quae facta est, meruit et rudis dici. Statim enim ut facta est, habuit inperfectae locum, ante perfectionem.

is his duty. So too I demand whether it could be called rough. For certainly that is rough which is imperfect. Certainly nothing can be imperfect except what has been made. For what has been made less than fully is imperfect. Certainly, you say. Therefore matter, which had not been made at all, could not be imperfect. What was not imperfect was also not rough. Having no beginning, because it was not made, it lacked also a rudimentary state. For the rudimentary state is an accident of a beginning. But the earth, which was made, deserved also to be called rough. For as soon as it was made, it held the place of an imperfect thing, before its perfection.

CAPUT XXIX.

Chapter XXIX.

Si quidem omnia opera sua Deus ordine consummavit, incultis primo elementis, depalans quodammodo mundum; dehinc exornatis velut dedicans. Nam et lumen non statim splendore solis implevit, et tenebras non statim solatio lunae temperavit, et coelum non statim sideribus stellisque signavit, et maria non statim belluis frequentavit, et ipsam terram non statim varia fecunditate dotavit: sed primo esse ei contulit; dehinc non in vacuum esse supplevit. Sic enim et Isaias: Non in vacuum, ait, fecit illam, sed inhabitari (Isa. XLV, 18). Postea ergo quam facta est, futura etiam perfecta, interim erat invisibilis et rudis. Rudis, quidem, hoc quoque ipso quod invisibilis, ut n⟨e⟩c visui perfecta, simul et ut de reliquo nondum instructa. Invisibilis vero, ut adhuc aquis, tanquam munimento genitalis humoris, obducta: qua forma, etiam adfinis ejus caro nostra producitur. Nam et David ita canit: Domini est terra et plenitudo ejus, orbis terrae, et omnes qui habitant in illa. Ipse super maria fundavit eam, et super flumina praeparavit eam (Psal. XXIII, 1, 2). Segregatis enim aquis in cavationem sinuum, emicantior facta est arida, quae antehac aquis tegebatur. Exinde itaque et visibilis efficitur, dicente Deo: Congregetur aqua in congregationem unam,

Since indeed God completed all His works in order, with the elements at first unadorned, as it were laying the world open; then, with them adorned, as it were dedicating it. For He did not at once fill the light with the splendour of the sun, nor at once temper the darkness with the solace of the moon, nor at once mark the heaven with constellations and stars, nor at once throng the seas with sea-beasts, nor at once endow the earth itself with varied fruitfulness: but first He conferred being upon it; then He filled it out, so that it should not be in vain. For thus Isaiah too: Not in vain, he says, did He make it, but to be inhabited (Isa. 45:18). After it was made, therefore, though destined also to be perfect, it was meanwhile invisible and rough. Rough indeed by this very fact too, that it was invisible, so as not to be perfect to the sight, and at the same time as not yet furnished with the rest. But invisible, as being still covered with waters, as with a protective covering of generative moisture: in which form our flesh too, akin to it, is brought forth. For David also sings thus: The earth is the Lord's and its fullness, the world, and all who dwell in it. He founded it upon the seas, and upon the rivers He prepared it (Ps. 23:1–2). For when the waters had been separated into the hollowing of basins, the dry land, which before was covered by waters, became more prominent. Thenceforth, therefore, it is also made visible, God saying: Let the water be gathered into one gathering,

Editors' notes and page, col. 247

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁵⁰ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Incultum scil. mundum Jun. minus bene.

Incultum ("untilled"), that is, mundum ("the world"): Junius, less well.

⁵¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Materiam Rhen. male edidit.

Rhenanus wrongly printed materiam ("matter").

⁵² ‹anchor: tanquam munimento› · call in col 247 Monimento Rhen.

Monimento ("by a monument"): Rhenanus.

⁵³ ‹anchor: in cavationem› · call in col 247 Cavatiorem sinum Rhen.

"A more hollowed bay": Rhenanus.

⁵⁴ ‹anchor: in congregationem› · call in col 247 In congregatione Rhen.

"In the gathering": Rhenanus.

⁵⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Jun legit ex devortio.

Junius reads "from the bypath."

⁵⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Fructificet Paris.

Fructificet ("let it bear fruit"): the Paris edition.

⁵⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Vet. cod. Wouw. inserit nec.

The old codex, Wouwer, inserts nec ("nor").

⁵⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Rhen. Seml. lignum fructum, et ex illa Rhen. conjiciebat ligni fructum: at Fran. et Paris. legunt lignum fructuosum faciens fructum; Rig. vero lignum fructuosum et ex alia.

Rhenanus, Semler: "the tree, fruit, and from it"; Rhenanus conjectured "the fruit of the tree"; but the Franeker and Paris editions read "the fruitful tree bearing fruit"; and Rigault "the fruitful tree, and from another."

⁵⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Hic Fran. Paris. Pamel.

Hic ("here"): Franeker and Paris editions, Pamelius.

⁶⁰ ‹anchor: et ita habilem› · call in col 248 Et habitabilem Latin.

"And habitable": the Latin [editions].

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 128)

(63) ‹anchor: Depalans quodammodo mundum› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 128) (63) Depalans quodammodo mundum. Depalans, hoc est, manifestans, palam ostendens. Adversus Marcionem, lib. V, Aspostolum vocat depalatorem disciplinae divinae, id est enarratorem, promulgatoremque. Nam depalare Tertulliano est propalare. Rhen.

In a manner disclosing the world. Depalans, that is, making manifest, showing openly. In Against Marcion, book 5, he calls the Apostle [printed Aspostolum] the depalator of the divine discipline, that is, its expounder and publisher. For to Tertullian depalare is propalare, to make public. Rhenanus.

(printed under page 128)

(64) ‹anchor: Dehinc exornatis velut dedicans› · call not visible

(printed under page 128) (64) Dehinc exornatis velut dedicans. Sic in lib. de Carnis resurr.: « De materia potius subjacent, inquit, volunt ab illo universitatem dedicatam; » et in lib. de Carne Christi, iterum de Carnis resurr. et lib. I, adv. Marcionem. Pam.

Then, as if dedicating it with adornments. So in the book On the Resurrection of the Flesh: "They would rather have the universe dedicated by him from underlying matter," he says; and in the book On the Flesh of Christ, again in On the Resurrection of the Flesh, and in book 1 Against Marcion. Pamelius.

(printed under page 128)

(65) ‹anchor: sed inhabitari› · call in col 247

(printed under page 128) (65) Sed inhabitari. Ad verbum vertit illud Isaiae XLV, ἀλλὰ κατοικεῖσθαι, pro ut inhabitaretur. Pam.

But to be inhabited. He renders that phrase of Isaiah 45 word for word, but to be dwelt in, for that it might be inhabited. Pamelius.

(printed under page 128)

(66) ‹anchor: qui habitant in illa› · call in col 247

(printed under page 128) (66) Orbis terrae et omnes qui habitant in ea. Veterem Psalmorum editionem veram esse, quam edidit Faber in Psalterio quintuplici, vel hinc patet, eamque ad verbum ex Graeca LXX ubi legitur ἐν αὐτῇ, et mox utrobique αὐτὴν pro eo quod B. Hieronymus, in utraque edit, ex Hebraea et Chaldaica, in eo, et mox bis in eum. Sive autem legatur cum Tertulliano, orbis terrae, sive cum aliis, orbis terrarum, perinde est, nam unica vox Graeca οἰκουμένη ad utramque est indifferens. Pam.

The world of the earth and all who dwell in it. That the old edition of the Psalms published by Faber in the Fivefold Psalter is the true one is plain even from this, and that it is word for word from the Greek Septuagint, where one reads "in her" [feminine], and shortly after "her" in both places, where blessed Jerome, in both his versions, from the Hebrew and the Chaldee, has in eo [masculine], and shortly after twice in eum. Whether one reads with Tertullian orbis terrae or with others orbis terrarum, it comes to the same, for the single Greek word oikouménē is neutral between them. Pamelius.

(printed under page 128)

(67) ‹anchor: emicantior facta est arida› · call in col 247

(printed under page 128) (67) Emicantior facta est arida. Sic libro de Anima, ut probabiles cuique emicarent. Ovidius, Emicuit summaque locum sibi legit in arce. Rig.

The dry land became more prominent. So in the book On the Soul, "that those approved might stand out to each." Ovid: "It leapt up and chose itself a place on the highest summit." Rigault.

(printed under page 128)

(68) ‹anchor: Sed invisibilis usque tunc videri sustinebat› · call not visible

(printed under page 128) (68) Sed invisibilis usque tunc videri sustinebat. Hoc est, exspectabat. Rig.

But, invisible until then, it was waiting to be seen. That is, it was awaiting [it]. Rigault.

(printed under page 128)

Page

running head: 247 TERTULLIANI OPERUM PARS II. — S (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A ‹bare debet. Sic et an rudis›; B ‹mavit, incultis primo elementis›; C ‹structa. Invisibilis vero, ut adhuc aquis›; D ‹notandus adversus haereticos› (in the commentary at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: 223 after depalans

PL 2:248

et videatur arida. Videatur inquit, non, fiat. Jam enim facta erat, sed invisibilis usque tunc videri sustinebat. Arida autem, quod erat futura ex divortio humoris, tamen terra. Et vocavit Deus aridam terram, non materiam. Sic et perfectionem postea consecuta, desinit rudis haberi, cum pronuntiat Deus: Fruticet terra herbam foeni seminantem semen secundum genus, et secundum similitudinem, et lignum fructuosum faciens fructum, cujus semen in ipso in similitudinem. Item: Producat terra animam vivam secundum genus, et quadrupedia, et repentia, et bestias terrae secundum genus. Implevit igitur ordinem suum Scriptura divina. Quam enim praedixit invisibilem et rudem, ei et visionem reddidit et perfectionem. Non alia autem materia erat invisibilis et rudis. Ergo materia erit postea visibilis et perfecta. Volo itaque videre materiam; visibilis enim facta est. Volo et perfectam eam recognoscere, ut ex illa etiam foeni herbam, et ex illa decerpam lignum fructuosum; et ex illa animalia usui meo famulentur. Sed materia quidem nusquam: terra vero, haec, id est coram. Hanc video, hac perfruor, ex quo invisibilis et rudis esse desiit, de qua manifestissime Isaias: Haec dicit Dominus qui fecit caelum (Isa. XLV, 18). Iste Deus qui demonstravit terram, et fecit illam. Certe eamdem demonstravit quam et fecit. Quomodo demonstravit? Utique dicendo: Videatur arida. Quare videri jubet, nisi quia retro non videbatur? ut si quoque eam non in vacuum fecisset faciendo visibilem, et ita habilem. Et sic per omnia probatur nobis hanc quam incolimus, eamdem et factam esse a Deo et ostensam, nec aliam fuisse rudem et invisibilem, quam quae et facta et ostensa est; atque ita, terra autem erat invisibilis et rudis, ad eam pertinet quam Deus cum coelo separavit.

and let the dry land appear. "Let it appear," He says, not "let it be made." For it had already been made, but, being invisible, it was until then waiting to be seen. "Dry," moreover, because it was going to be so from the separation of the moisture, yet [it was] earth. And God called the dry land earth, not matter. So too, having afterwards attained perfection, it ceases to be held unformed, when God pronounces: Let the earth sprout the grass of hay, sowing seed according to kind and according to likeness, and the fruitful tree bearing fruit, whose seed is in itself according to likeness. Likewise: Let the earth bring forth a living soul according to kind, and four-footed things, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth according to kind. Divine Scripture has therefore fulfilled its own order. For to that which it foretold as invisible and unformed it also rendered sight and perfection. But no other than matter was invisible and unformed. Therefore it will be matter that is afterwards visible and perfect. I wish, then, to see matter; for it has been made visible. I wish also to recognize it as perfect, so that from it I may pluck even the grass of hay, and from it the fruitful tree, and that from it animals may serve my use. But matter is nowhere; the earth, however, this one, is, that is, before my eyes. This I see, this I enjoy, from the time it ceased to be invisible and unformed, concerning which Isaiah says most plainly: Thus says the Lord Who made heaven (Isa. 45:18). This is the God Who showed the earth, and made it. Certainly He showed the same one that He also made. How did He show it? Surely by saying: Let the dry land appear. Why does He bid it be seen, unless because formerly it was not seen? as if also He had made it not in vain, by making it visible, and thus fit [for use]. And so by every point it is proved to us that this [earth] which we inhabit is the same that was both made by God and shown, and that no other was unformed and invisible than that which was both made and shown; and thus "and the earth was invisible and unformed" pertains to that which God separated from heaven.

CAPUT XXX.

Chapter XXX.

Sic et sequentia conjecturam Hermogenis instruere

So too the following [words], to build up the conjecture of Hermogenes,

Editors' notes and page, col. 248

Page

running head: PARS II. — SERIES I, POLEMICA. 248
marginal letters: A et videatur arida; B autem materia erat invisibilis; C batur? ut si quoque; D XLV, ἀλλὰ κατοικεῖσθαι (in the Commentarius notes at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: 224 after enim

PL 2:249

videbuntur : Et tenebrae super abyssum, et spiritus Dei super aquas ferebatur (Gen. I, 2) ; quasi et hae confusae substantiae, massalis illius molis argumenta portendant. Atquin sigillatim definiens tenebras, abyssum, spiritum Dei, aquas, nihil confusum, nec in confusione incertum aestimari facit tam divisa relatio certorum et distinctorum elementorum. Hoc quidem amplius, cum situs proprios eis ascribit, tenebras super abyssum, spiritum super aquas, negavit confusionem substantiarum, quarum demonstrando dispositionem, demonstravit etiam distinctionem, Vanissimum denique, ut materia quae informis inducitur, de tot formarum vocabulis informis asseveretur, non edito quid sit illud corpus confusionis, quod unicum utique credendum est, si informe est : uniforme etenim quod informe est. Informe autem, quod ex varietate confusum est, unam habeat necesse est speciem; quod non habet speciem, dum ex multis unam habet speciem. Caeterum, aut habebat in se species istas materia, de quarum vocabulis intelligenda esset, tenebras dico, et abyssum, et spiritum, et aquas, aut non habebat. Si enim habebat, quomodo agnoscitur.

will seem: "And darkness over the abyss, and the Spirit of God was borne over the waters" (Gen. 1:2); as if these too, being substances in confusion, held out proofs of that massive bulk. Yet by defining one by one darkness, abyss, Spirit of God, waters, so divided an account of certain and distinct elements causes nothing to be reckoned confused, nor uncertain through confusion. Indeed, more than this: when it assigns them their proper positions, darkness over the abyss, the Spirit over the waters, it denied a confusion of substances, and by demonstrating their arrangement it demonstrated also their distinction. Most empty, finally, that matter, which is introduced as formless, should be asserted to be formless from so many names of forms, without its being stated what that body of confusion is, which surely must be believed to be single, if it is formless: for what is formless is uniform. But the formless, which is confused out of variety, must necessarily have one form; that which has not a form, while out of many it has one form. Moreover, either matter had in itself these forms, from whose names it was to be understood, darkness, I mean, and abyss, and spirit, and waters, or it did not have them. For if it had them, how is it recognized.

CAPUT XXXI.

Chapter XXXI.

Sed et illud utique captabitur : de coelo solo et de terra ista Scripturam significasse, quod eam in principio Deus fecerit, de speciebus autem supradictis nihil tale : et ideo eas quae factae non significentur, ad infectam materiam pertinere. Respondebimus huic quoque scrupulo. Scriptura divina satis dissereret, si summas ipsas rerum a Deo factas commendasset coelum et terram, habentes utique

But this too will surely be seized upon: that Scripture indicated, concerning the heaven alone and this earth, that God made it in the beginning, but nothing of the kind concerning the forms mentioned above; and that therefore those which are not indicated as made belong to the unmade matter. We shall answer this scruple too. Divine Scripture would have discoursed sufficiently if it had set forth the very chief of the things made by God, heaven and earth, having surely

Editors' notes and page, col. 249

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁶¹ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Diversa Jun. ex cod. Vatic.

Diversa ("different"): Junius, from the Vatican codex.

⁶² ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Vanitimum Rhen. Jun. Seml. qui quid Graecum latere suspicatur.

Vanitimum: Rhenanus, Junius, Semler, who suspects that some Greek word lies hidden [in it].

⁶³ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Habet Jun.

Habet ("has"): Junius.

⁶⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Intelligendas esse tenebras dico Rhen. Seml. Rig. melius ex cod. Wouw.

"I say the darkness is to be understood": Rhenanus, Semler; Rigault, better, from the codex, Wouwer.

⁶⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Si autem Jun.

Si autem ("but if"): Junius.

⁶⁶ ‹anchor: quomodo agnoscitur› · call in col 249 Agnoscitur Rhen. Seml. Pamel.

Agnoscitur ("is it recognized"): Rhenanus, Semler, Pamelius.

⁶⁷ ‹anchor: ista Scripturam› · call in col 249 Ita Rhen. Seml. Oberth. Scripturarum Rigalt. Venet.

So Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür. Scripturarum ("of the Scriptures"): Rigault, the Venice edition.

⁶⁸ ‹anchor: satis dissereret› · call in col 249 Rhen. conjiciebant legend. esse: disserit, et mox: commendans et coelum, melius alii ad Jun. si summas.

Rhenanus [and others] conjectured that one should read disserit ("discusses"), and shortly after "commending both heaven"; others better, at Junius, "if the chief."

⁶⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Contempta dantur alii, teste Junio, e cod Vat.

"Despised things are given": others, on the witness of Junius, from the Vatican codex.

⁷⁰ ‹anchor: Costam vero› · call in col 250 Rhen. cui tam vero; conjiciebat enim vero et ossa. Sed Paris. cutem vero; et Fran. Rig. Jun. Pamel. costam vero.

Rhenanus: "to whom so truly"; for he conjectured "truly, and the bones." But the Paris edition: "the skin, however"; and Franeker, Rigault, Junius, Pamelius: "the rib, however."

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 129)

(69) ‹anchor: Vanissimum denique› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 129) (69) Vanissimum denique, etc. Vatic. mss. cod. et Editio legunt, vanitimum, sed quia nusquam eam vocem reperi, placet vulgata lectio. Quas autem mox vocat species, paulo post formas dicit, quare non arridet Vatic. cod. varia lectio, formam, et legendum cum Latinio interrogative, Si non habebat, quomodo agnoscitur? Pam. — Hallensis editor, sub Rhenani lectione quam ipse Juniusque tuentur, latere quid graecum suspicatur: index latinitatis Tertullianeae ad hanc vocem eam esse antiquam monet, a vano dictam, ac designare quod magnopere ad vanitatem idolorum debet referri. Edd.

Most vain, finally, etc. The Vatican manuscript codex and the edition read vanitimum; but since I have nowhere found that word, the common reading is preferred. And the things he presently calls species, a little later he calls forms; therefore the Vatican codex's variant formam does not please, and with Latinius one should read it as a question: If it did not have [form], how is it recognized? Pamelius. — The Halle editor suspects that something Greek lies hidden under Rhenanus's reading, which he and Junius defend; the index of Tertullian's Latinity notes that the word is ancient, formed from vanus, and denotes what is very much to be referred to the vanity of idols. The editors.

(printed under page 129)

(70) ‹anchor: Et statuae super Euripum› · call not visible

(printed under page 129) (70) Et statuae super Euripum. Euripus, fretum quod est ad Chalcidem, nomen dedit ob similitudinem fossis quibus ludi circumdabantur septorum loco. Factum deinde est, ut pro qualibet fossa aut canali coeperit Euripus usurpari. Plinius nepos in epist. ad Caninium Rufum: « Quid Euripus viridis et gemmeus? » Vitruvius, lib. VII: « Pinguntur enim portus, promontoria, littora, flumina, fontes, euripi, fana, luci, montes, pecora, pastores. » Rhen. — Super Euripum. Euripus in ludis Circensibus stagnum erat aut fretum. Hesychius enim auctor est his verbis aquarum esse receptaculum. Εὐρίπους vocat δέξας ὑδάτων. Cassiodorus, lib. III, epist. 51: « Euripus maris vitrei reddit imaginem, unde illud: Delphini aequoris aquas interfluunt. » Nova littora, et ficta flumina Euripi dicuntur Manilio lib. IV Astronom. Vide Suetonium. in Julio, cap. 39. Le Pr.

And statues above the Euripus. The Euripus, the strait at Chalcis, gave its name, from the likeness, to the ditches with which the games were surrounded in place of enclosures. Then it came about that "euripus" began to be used for any ditch or channel. Pliny the Younger, in the letter to Caninius Rufus: "What of the euripus, green and jewelled?" Vitruvius, book 7: "For harbours are painted, headlands, shores, rivers, springs, euripi, shrines, groves, mountains, flocks, shepherds." Rhenanus. — Above the Euripus. In the Circensian games the Euripus was a pool or channel. For Hesychius is the authority that it was a reservoir of water, in these words: he calls euripi "receivers of waters" [printed dexas hydatōn]. Cassiodorus, book 3, letter 51: "The Euripus presents the image of a glassy sea, whence that saying: dolphins swim through the waters of the deep." The Euripus is called "new shores and feigned rivers" by Manilius, Astronomica book 4. See Suetonius, Julius, chapter 39. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 129)

(71) ‹anchor: Et obeliscus super omnia› · call not visible

(printed under page 129) (71) Et obeliscus super omnia. In circo fuisse columnam illam quae obeliscus dicitur nemo dubitat. Augustus obeliscum erexit in circo a Semneserte rege excisum, 125 ped. altum et dodrante, praeter basim illius lapidis. Alter fuit in campo Martio, novem pedibus minor a Sesostride exsculptus. Insignis hodie est obeliscus ille vaticanus Romae, ex lapide ophite, cujus altitudo est pedum 170, praeter basim quae pedes continet 37. Is opera Dominici Fontanae Comensis e sinistro Vaticani templi latere in mediam plateam translatus est an. 1586. Porro lib. de Spectac. cap. 8. Obelisci enormitas dicitur. De hoc Plin. lib. XXXVI, c. 9. Le Pr.

And the obelisk above all. No one doubts that the column called an obelisk stood in the circus. Augustus set up in the circus an obelisk cut by King Semnesertes, 125¾ feet high [125 feet and three-quarters], not counting the base of that stone. Another was in the Campus Martius, nine feet shorter, carved by Sesostris. Notable today is the Vatican obelisk at Rome, of serpentine stone, whose height is 170 feet, besides the base, which measures 37 feet. Through the work of Domenico Fontana of Como it was moved from the left side of the Vatican church into the middle of the square in the year 1586. Further, in the book On the Shows, chapter 8, there is mention of the enormity of the obelisk. On this, Pliny book 36, chapter 9. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 129)

Page

running head: 249 LIBER ADV. HERMOGEN[EM] (cut off at right edge)
marginal letters: A ‹struere videbuntur›; B ‹que credendum est, si informe est›; C ‹dictis nihil tale›; D ‹non arridet Vatic. cod.› (in the Commentarius)
old-edition numerals: 225 after informis

PL 2:250

suggestus suos proprios, qui in ipsis summis intelligi possint. Suggestus autem coeli et terrae primo tunc fuerint tenebrae, et abyssus, et spiritus, et aquae. Nam terrae quidem suberat abyssus et tenebrae. Si enim abyssus infra terram, tenebrae autem super abyssum, sine dubio et tenebrae et abyssus infra terram. Coelo vero spiritus et aquae subjacebant: nam si aquae super terram, quae eam texerant, spiritus autem super aquas, pariter et spiritus et aquae snper terram. Quae vero super terram, ea utique infra coelum. Et sicut terra abysso et tenebris, ita et coelum spiritui et aquis incubabat, et complectebantur. Et ita novum non est, u⟨t⟩ id solum quod continet nominetur, qua summale⟨:⟩ in isto autem intelligatur et quod continetur, qua portionale. Ecce, si dicam, Civitas exstruxit theatrum et circum: scena autem erat talis et talis, et statuae super Euripum, et obeliscus super omnia ferebatur: quia non et has species edixerim factas a civitate, non erunt ab ea cum circo et theatro? an ideo non adjeci factas has quoque species, quia inerant eis quae facta praedixeram, et inesse quibus inerant, intelligi poterant? Sed vacet hoc exemplum, ut humanum; aliud de auctoritate Scripturae ipsius arripiam: Fecit, inquit, Deus hominem de terra, et afflavit in faciem ejus flatum vitae, et factus est homo in animam vivam. Faciem quidem ejus hic nominat, sed nec ipsam factam a Deo dixit: Costam, vero et ossa, et carnem, et oculos, et sudorem, et sanguinem (Gen. II, 21, 23 : III, 5, 29; IV, 10) postea loquitur, qnae nec tunc facta a Deo significavit. Quid respondebit Hermogenes? Numquid et membra hominis ad materiam pertinebunt, quia non nominatim facta referuntur? An et haec in

their own furnishings, which may be understood within the very sum-totals themselves. Now the furnishings of heaven and earth at first would then have been the darkness, and the abyss, and the spirit, and the waters. For beneath the earth lay the abyss and the darkness. For if the abyss was below the earth, and the darkness above the abyss, without doubt both the darkness and the abyss were below the earth. But beneath heaven lay the spirit and the waters: for if the waters, which had covered it, were above the earth, and the spirit above the waters, then equally both the spirit and the waters were above the earth. And whatever is above the earth is certainly below heaven. And just as the earth lay upon the abyss and the darkness, so also heaven lay upon the spirit and the waters, and they were embraced [by it]. And so it is nothing new that only that which contains should be named, as the sum-total, while in it is understood also that which is contained, as the portion. Look, if I were to say: The city built a theatre and a circus; and the stage was of such and such a kind, and statues stood above the Euripus, and an obelisk was raised above all: because I have not also declared that these features were made by the city, will they not be from it together with the circus and the theatre? Or did I not add that these features too were made precisely because they were inherent in the things which I had already stated to have been made, and could be understood to be inherent in those in which they inhered? But let this example be set aside, as being human; I shall seize another from the authority of Scripture itself: God, it says, made man from the earth, and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul. His face indeed it names here, but it did not say that even this was made by God: the rib, however, and the bones, and the flesh, and the eyes, and the sweat, and the blood it speaks of afterwards (Gen. 2:21, 23; 3:5, 29; 4:10), which it did not indicate were made by God even then. What will Hermogenes answer? Will the members of man too belong to matter, because they are not reported by name as having been made? Or are these too in

Editors' notes and page, col. 250

Page

running head: [A]DV. HERMOGENEM. (left edge cut off; column number 250)
marginal letters: A suggestus suos proprios; B Ecce, si dicam; C sudorem, et sanguinem; D 51 : « Euripus maris vitrei (in the commentary)
old-edition numerals: 226 after intelligatur

PL 2:251

hominis factitatione censentur? Proinde membra erunt coeli et terrae abyssus et tenebrae, spiritus et aquae. In corporibus enim membra sunt facta: in corporibus et membra sunt nominata. Nullum elementum non membrum est ejus elementi quo continetur: omnia autem elementa coelo aut terra continentur.

the making of man reckoned? Accordingly the deep and the darkness, the spirit and the waters, will be members of heaven and earth. For in the bodies the members were made; in the bodies the members were also named. There is no element which is not a member of that element by which it is contained; and all elements are contained by heaven or earth.

CAPUT XXXII.

Chapter XXXII.

Haec responderim pro Scriptura praesenti, quatenus hic solorum corporum factitationem commendare videtur coeli et terrae. Scivit esse qui ultro in corporibus et membra cognoscerent, et ideo compendio usa est. Providit tamen et hebetes et insidiosos, qui dissimulato tacito intellectu, ipsis quoque membris verbum factitationis significatorium exigerent. Itaque et propter istos singulas species factas docet aliis in locis. Habes Sophiam: Prior autem abysso genita sum, dicentem: ut credas abyssum quoque genitam, id est factam, quia et filios facimus, licet generemus. Nihil interest facta an nata sit abyssus, dum initium detur illi, quod non daretur si materiae subjecta esset. De tenebris vero ipse Dominus per Isaiam: Ego qui struxi lucem et feci tenebras (Isa. XLV, 7). De spiritu aeque Amos: Qui solidat tonitruum et condit spiritum, et annuntiat in homines Christum suum (Amos, IV, 13): eum spiritum conditum ostendens, qui in terras conditas deputabatur, qui super aquas ferebatur, librator, et adflator, et animator universitatis: non, ut quidam putant, ipsum Deum significari spiritum, quia Deus spiritus. Neque enim aquae Dominum sustinere sufficerent; sed eum spiritum dicit de quo etiam venti constiterunt, ut ait per Isaiam: Quia

This is what I would answer on behalf of the present Scripture, in so far as here it seems to set forth the making of the bodies alone of heaven and earth. It knew that there were those who would of their own accord recognize the members also in the bodies, and therefore it made use of brevity. Yet it foresaw also the dull and the insidious, who, dissembling the tacit sense, would demand for the members themselves too a word signifying their making. And so, on account of these also, it teaches in other places that the individual parts were made. You have Wisdom saying: But before the deep I was begotten: so that you may believe that the deep also was begotten, that is, made, since we also make sons, although we beget them. It makes no difference whether the deep was made or born, provided that a beginning is granted to it, which would not be granted if it were subject to matter. Of the darkness, indeed, the Lord Himself through Isaiah: I who built the light and made the darkness (Isa. 45:7). Of the spirit likewise Amos: Who makes firm the thunder and creates the spirit, and announces to men His Christ (Amos 4:13): showing that that spirit was created which was assigned to the created earth, which was borne over the waters, the balancer and breather and animator of the universe; not, as some think, that God Himself is signified by the spirit, because God is spirit. For the waters would not suffice to bear up the Lord; but he means that spirit from which the winds also have arisen, as He says through Isaiah: For

Editors' notes and page, col. 251

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁷¹ ‹anchor: membra erunt› · call in col 251 Erant alii.

Erant ("they were"): others.

⁷² ‹anchor: commendare› · call in col 251 Rhen. suspicabatur commentari; commendare legunt Fran. Paris. Rig. commentari Seml.

Rhenanus suspected commentari ("to comment"); the Franeker and Paris editions and Rigault read commendare ("to commend"); Semler commentari.

⁷³ ‹anchor: Scivit› · call in col 251 Sciit. Fran. Pamel. scivit Rig. Lat. Scit. Seml. Oberth.

Sciit ("knew"): Franeker edition, Pamelius; scivit: Rigault, the Latin [editions]; scit ("knows"): Semler, Oberthür.

⁷⁴ ‹anchor: significatorium› · call in col 251 Significatorum Seml. Oberth.

Significatorum ("of the things signified"): Semler, Oberthür.

⁷⁵ ‹anchor: aliis in locis› · call in col 251 Aliis in locis habere Sophiam Seml. Oberth. absque ullo sensu legit: aliis in locis. Habere Sophiam.

"In other places to have Sophia": Semler, Oberthür; [one] reads, without any sense, "in other places. To have Sophia."

⁷⁶ ‹anchor: si materiae subjecta esset› · call in col 251 Si materiae subjiciatur, esset de tenebris Seml., qui proponit legere: subjiciatur esse.

"If it be subjected to matter, it would be of the darkness": Semler, who proposes reading "be subjected to be."

⁷⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Rhenanus legi volebat: fontes aqua reum quae sub. Pamel. Fran. Fontes quae sub coelo est: alii, teste Junio, qui sub coelo.

Rhenanus wanted the reading "the springs of the water [printed aqua reum] which [is] under"; Pamelius, Franeker edition: "the springs which is under heaven"; others, on the witness of Junius: "which [are] under heaven."

⁷⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Sunt Rhen. Seml.

Sunt ("they are"): Rhenanus, Semler.

⁷⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Ex aquis Seml. Oberth.

"From the waters": Semler, Oberthür.

⁸⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Si qua ferant Seml. ex Rhen. cujus conjecturam: Si quae erant receperunt omnes.

"If they bring anything": Semler, from Rhenanus, whose conjecture it is; "if any there were": all have adopted.

⁸¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Generosiora essent scrib. Fran. Paris. post Rhen. conjecturam.

"Would be nobler" is written by the Franeker and Paris editions, following Rhenanus's conjecture.

⁸² ‹anchor: Moyses› · call in col 252 Moyses scribit Rhen. Seml. dum scribit Paris.

"Moses writes": Rhenanus, Semler; "while he writes": the Paris edition.

⁸³ ‹anchor: non potuit› · call in col 252 Non potuerit. Rhen. Pamel. Seml. Non potuerat Paris. non potuerit satis Fran.

"Could not": Rhenanus, Pamelius, Semler. "Had not been able": the Paris edition. "Could not well enough": the Franeker edition.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 130)

(72) ‹anchor: In hominis factitatione› · call in col 251

(printed under page 130) (72) In hominis factitatione. Factitationis vocabulum a verbo frequentativo deductum neminem moveat. Nam et in praeced. lib. non solum in hoc opere factitationem pro creatione sive conditione accipit. Adversum valet, ergo et factum, inquit, intelligebat, et factitatorem facti esse quemcunque. Rhen.

In the making of man. Let no one be troubled by the word factitatio, derived from a frequentative verb. For in the preceding book too, not only in this work, he takes factitatio for creation or founding. It has the contrary force: "so he understood it as made," he says, "and that whatever is made has a maker." Rhenanus.

(printed under page 130)

(73) ‹anchor: Dominum sustinere sufficerent› · call in col 251

(printed under page 130) (73) Neque enim aquae Dominum sustinere sufficerent. Probat hoc loco sententiam existimantium Dei spiritu ipsum Dominum significari. Quasi vero, inquit, Dei Spiritum super aquas ferri convenerit, ob fluxam et instabilem aquarum naturam: nec potuerit Deus aquas ipsius figere, ut starent; quod praestitit Israeli transducendo, aut solidare, ut calcarentur, quod fidei discipulorum erudiendae confecit. Et tamen vulgatae illi sententiae favet impensius lib. de Baptismo, cum ait: « Solus liquor, semper materia perfecta, lata, simplex, de suo pura dignum vectaculum Deo subjiciebat. » Sic autem solet Septimius: arripit omnem Scripturam aedificationi habilem, tanquam divinitus inspiratam. Adeoque hunc colorem dicit lib. de Cultu feminar., primo, ubi excusat citatum abs se librum Enoch, et libro de Spectaculis, late semper Scripturam divinam dividi ait, ubicunque secundum praesentis rei sensum etiam disciplina munitur. Caeterum, verissima omnium interpretatio videatur, his verbis, Spiritus Dei ferebatur super aquas, significari, aquis tum primum creatis adfuisse vim quamdam vitalem, non fuisse simpliciter aquam, sed aquam vivam; quae non torpesceret iners stupore pigro: sed quae perenni spiritu vegetata semper trepidaret ne quando quiescere diceretur. Hoc certe innuit Noster pagina libri de Baptismo supra citata. Chrysostomus autem apertissime hom. 3, in Gen: Τί βούλεται τοῦτο τὸ εἰρημένον Πνεῦμα, φησί, Θεοῦ ἐπεφέρετο ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος; Ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ τοῦτο σημαίνειν, ὅτι ἐνέργειά τις ζωτικὴ προσῆν τοῖς ὕδασι, καὶ οὐκ ἦν ἁπλῶς ὕδωρ ἑστὼς καὶ ἀκίνητον, ἀλλὰ κινούμενον, καὶ ζωτικήν τινα δύναμιν ἔχον. Rig.

For the waters would not have been strong enough to bear the Lord. In this place he approves the opinion of those who think that the Lord Himself is signified by the Spirit of God. As if, he says, it would have been fitting for the Spirit of God to be borne upon the waters, given the fluid and unstable nature of water; and as if God could not have fixed His waters so that they stood, as He did in bringing Israel across, or made them solid to be walked on, as He did to train the faith of the disciples. And yet in the book On Baptism he favours that common opinion more strongly, when he says: "Water alone, always a perfect matter, glad, simple, pure of itself, set itself beneath God as a worthy vehicle." But this is Septimius's habit: he seizes on every Scripture apt for edification, as divinely inspired. So he speaks of this colouring in book one On the Apparel of Women, where he excuses his citing the book of Enoch, and in the book On the Shows he says that divine Scripture always divides widely wherever discipline too is fortified according to the sense of the matter in hand. For the rest, the truest interpretation of all would seem to be that by these words, The Spirit of God was borne upon the waters, it is signified that a certain life-giving power was present to the waters when first created; that it was not simply water, but living water, which did not grow numb and inert in sluggish torpor, but, quickened by an everlasting spirit, was always astir, so that it might never be said to rest. Our author certainly hints at this on the page of the book On Baptism cited above. But Chrysostom says it most plainly, Homily 3 on Genesis: "What does this saying mean, 'the Spirit of God was borne above the water'? To me it seems to signify that a certain life-giving energy was present to the waters, and that it was not simply standing and motionless water, but moving, and having a certain life-giving power." Rigault.

(printed under page 130)

Page

running head: 251 TERTULLIANI OPERUM PARS II. — S (cut off at the right edge of the image)
marginal letters: A hominis factitatione censentur; B verbum factitationis significatorium; C tas deputabatur, qui super aquas; D beside the Commentarius note (72) In hominis factitatione (footnote area, not set)
old-edition numerals: 227 after abysso

PL 2:252

spiritus a me exivit et flatum omnem ego feci (Isa. LVII, 26). Item de aquis eadem Sophia: Et cum firmos ponebat fontes ejus quae sub caelo est, ego eram modulans cum ipso (Prov. VIII, 28, 49). Cum ergo et eas species probamus a Deo factas, etsi in Genesi tantummodo nominantur sine factitationis mentione, respondebitur fortasse ex diverso: Plane factas eas, sed ex materia: ut stylus quidem Moysi, Et tenebrae super abyssum et spiritus Dei super aquas ferebatur, materiam sonet: caeterae vero Scripturae, quae ex materia factae sint species, in disperso demonstrent. Ergo sicut terra de terra, ita et abyssus ex abysso, et tenebrae ex tenebris, et spiritus et aquae ex spiritu et aquis constiterunt. Et sicut supra diximus, non potuit informis fuisse materia, si species habebat, ut et aliae ex ea sint confectae; nisi quod non aliae, sed ipsae ex semetipsis: siquidem non capit diversas fuisse quae iisdem nominibus eduntur, quo jam operatio divina otiosa videri possit, si quae erant fecit: cum generosior esset, quae non erant facta, si fierent. Igitur ut concludam, aut materiam tunc significavit Moyses cum scribit: Et tenebrae super abyssum, et spiritus Dei super aquas ferebatur: aut cum hae species alibi postea demonstrantur factae a Deo, debuerunt aeque demonstrari ex materia, quam Moyses praemiserat, factae: aut si species istas, et non materiam significavit Moyses, ubi mataria demonstrata sit quaero.

the spirit went out from me, and every breath I have made (Isa. 57:16). Likewise concerning the waters the same Wisdom [says]: And when He was setting firm the fountains of that which is under heaven, I was making harmony with Him (Prov. 8:28–29). Since, therefore, we prove that these forms too were made by God, although in Genesis they are merely named without mention of their being made, it will perhaps be answered from the opposing side: Certainly they were made, but out of matter; so that the pen of Moses, And darkness over the abyss, and the Spirit of God was borne over the waters, sounds of matter, while the other Scriptures show here and there which forms were made out of matter. Therefore, just as earth [came] from earth, so too abyss from abyss, and darkness from darkness, and spirit and waters came to be from spirit and waters. And, as we said above, matter could not have been formless if it had forms, so that others too were fashioned from it; except that [they were] not others, but the very same [made] out of themselves: since it is not admissible that things which are brought forth under the same names were different, whereby the divine operation might now seem idle, if it made things which already were, when it would have been nobler if things which had not been made were made. So, to conclude: either Moses then signified matter when he writes: And darkness over the abyss, and the Spirit of God was borne over the waters; or, since these forms are shown elsewhere later to have been made by God, they ought equally to have been shown to have been made out of the matter which Moses had put forward beforehand; or, if Moses signified these forms and not matter, I ask where matter has been shown.

CAPUT XXXIII.

Chapter XXXIII.

Sed dum illam Hermogenes inter colores suos invenit (inter Scripturas enim Dei invenire non potuit), satis est quod omnia et facta a Deo constat

But while Hermogenes found it among his own colourings (for among the Scriptures of God he could not find it), it is enough that all things are agreed to have been both made by God

Editors' notes and page, col. 252

Page

running head: …PARS II. — SERIES I, POLEMICA. 252 (left part cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A spiritus a me exivit; B materia, si species habebat; C sit quaero.; D tioni habilem (beside editors' commentary)
old-edition numerals: 228 after esset

PL 2:253

et ex materia non constat : quae etiam si fuisset, ipsam quoque a Deo factam credidissemus, quia nihil innatum praeter Deum praescribentes, obtineremus. In hunc usque articulum locus est retractatui, donec ad Scripturas provocata deficiat exhibitio materiae. Expedita summa est : nihil invenio factum nihil ex nihilo, quia quod factum invenio, non fuisse cognosco. Etiamsi quid ex aliquo factum est, ex facto habet censum, ut ex terra herba, et fructus, et pecudes, et figuratio hominis ipsius, ut ex aquis natatiles et volatiles animae. Hujusmodi origines rerum ex his prolatarum, potero materias appellare; sed factas a Deo et ipsas.

and are not agreed [to have been made] out of matter: and even if it had existed, we would have believed that this too was made by God, since we would hold our ground by laying down that nothing is unborn except God. Up to this point there is room for reconsideration, until the production of matter, once challenged to the Scriptures, fails. The sum of it is settled: I find nothing made except out of nothing, because what I find made, I recognize not to have existed. Even if something has been made out of something, it takes its origin from something made, as from the earth the grass, and the fruits, and the cattle, and the forming of man himself, as from the waters the swimming and flying creatures. The origins of things of this kind, brought forth out of these, I shall be able to call matters; but these too were made by God.

CAPUT XXXIV.

Chapter XXXIV.

Caeterum, omne ex nihilo constitisse, illa postremo divina dispositio suadebit, quae omnia in nihilum redactura est. Si quidem et caelum convolvetur ut liber (Isa. XXXIV, 4), imo nusquam fiet cum ipsa terra, cum qua primordio factum est (Matth. XXIV, 21, 35). Caelum et terra praeteribunt, inquit. Caelum primum, et terra prima abierunt, et locus non est inventus illis (Apoc. XXI, 1), quia scilicet quod et finit, loeum amittit. Sic et David, Opera manuum tuarum ⟨sunt⟩ caeli et ipsi peribunt (Psal. CI, 26, 27). Nam etsi mutabit illos velut opertorium, et mutabuntur; sed mutari, perire est pristino statui, quem dum mutantur, amittunt. Et stellae quidem de caelo ruent, sicut fici arbor, cum valido commota vento, acerba sua amittit (Apoc. VI, 13). Montes vero tanquam cera liquescent a conspectu Domini (Psal. XCVII, 5) : cum surrexerit scilicet confringere terram (Isa. II, 19). Sed et paludes, inquit, arefaciam; et quaerent aquam, nec invenient (Isa. XCI 17 : XCII, 18) : etiam mare hactenus. Quae omnia etsi alter putaverit spiritaliter interpretanda, non tamen poterit auferre veritatem ita futurorum, quomodo scripta sunt. Si quae eaim figurae sunt, ex rebus consistentibus fiant necesse est, non ex vocantibus : quia nihil potest

Moreover, that everything came into being out of nothing, that final divine dispensation will persuade, which is to reduce all things to nothing. For indeed the heaven too will be rolled up like a book (Isa. 34:4), nay, it will be nowhere, together with the earth itself, with which it was made in the beginning (Matt. 24:21, 35). Heaven and earth will pass away, He says. The first heaven and the first earth have gone away, and no place was found for them (Rev. 21:1), because, of course, whatever comes to an end also loses its place. So too David: The works of Thy hands are the heavens, and they themselves will perish (Ps. 101:26–27). For although He will change them like a covering, and they will be changed; yet to be changed is to perish to the former state, which they lose while they are being changed. And the stars indeed will fall from heaven, as a fig tree, shaken by a strong wind, loses its unripe fruit (Rev. 6:13). The mountains, moreover, will melt like wax at the sight of the Lord (Ps. 97:5), namely, when He has risen to shatter the earth (Isa. 2:19). But also the marshes, He says, I will dry up; and they will seek water, and will not find it (Isa. 91:17; 92:18): even the sea thus far [and no further]. And although someone may think that all these things are to be interpreted spiritually, yet he will not be able to take away the truth of their coming to pass thus, as they are written. For if there are any figures, they must be made out of things that exist, not out of empty things: because nothing can

Editors' notes and page, col. 253

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁸⁴ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Divina abest Venet.

Divina ("divine") is absent in the Venice edition.

⁸⁵ ‹anchor: mutabit› · call in col 253 Et sic mutabit. Jun.

"And so he will change": Junius.

⁸⁶ ‹anchor: quem› · call in col 253 Quae dum Seml. Oberth.

"Which, while": Semler, Oberthür.

⁸⁷ ‹anchor: etiam mare hactenus› · call in col 253 Mare Oceanus Fran Pamel. Paris. Post vero Rhenanum Rigalt. servat hactenus: ita omnes deinceps.

"The sea, the Ocean": Franeker edition, Pamelius, Paris edition. But after Rhenanus, Rigault keeps hactenus ("thus far"); so all thereafter.

⁸⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Nihil potest ad similitudinem de suo praestare Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

"Nothing can supply of its own towards a likeness": Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

⁸⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Virtutes et potestates suas Rhen. Pamel. Oberth. Virtute et potestate sua Jun.

"His virtues and powers": Rhenanus, Pamelius, Oberthür. "By his virtue and power": Junius.

⁹⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Erit Rhen. Seml.

Erit ("will be"): Rhenanus, Semler.

⁹¹ ‹anchor: corporalis aut incorporalis› · call in col 254 Duo verba ultima desunt Rhen. et sequacibus ejus.

The last two words are missing in Rhenanus and his followers.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 131)

(74) ‹anchor: Coelum primum et terra prima abierunt› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 131) (74) Coelum primum et terra prima abierunt. Transtulit hoc Latine magis quam ad verbum, quia Apoc. XXI, legitur παρῆλθεν, id est, abiit, deinde legit, Et locum non est inventus illis, pro eo quod Graece et Latine: Et mare jam non est. Rhen.

The first heaven and the first earth have passed away. He rendered this into Latin by sense rather than word for word, because in Apocalypse 21 one reads parēlthen, that is, went away; then he reads, And no place was found for them, in place of what the Greek and Latin have: And the sea is no more. Rhenanus.

(printed under page 131)

(75) ‹anchor: sicut fici arbor› · call in col 253

(printed under page 131) (75) Et stellae quidem de coelo ruent, sicut fici arbor. Verba haec ex Apocalypsi desumpta sunt, ubi sic legitur: Καὶ οἱ ἀστέρες τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἔπεσαν εἰς τὴν γῆν, ὡς συκῆ βάλλει τοὺς ὀλύνθους αὐτῆς ὑπὸ μεγάλου ἀνέμου σειομένη, hoc est, Et stellae de coelo ceciderunt, sicut ficus abjicit grossos suos cum a magno vento movetur. Porro ὄλυνθοι Graecis sunt quos Latini grossos vocant, hoc est fici nondum maturae. Tertullianus pro grossis vertit, acerba sua: editio Vulgata habet grossos suos, est autem eadem propemodum interpretatio, quod vertit Tertullianus. Nam nihil aliud est ὄλυνθος sive grossus, quam ficus dura adhuc atque acerba. Theodorus Gaza in opere de plantis ὄλυνθον vocat caprificum. Rhen. — Fici arbor acerba sua amittit. Grossos suos. Rig.

And the stars shall fall from heaven, as a fig tree. These words are taken from the Apocalypse, where one reads thus: "And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, as a fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by a great wind," that is, And the stars fell from heaven, as the fig tree casts off its green figs when it is moved by a great wind. Now olynthoi to the Greeks are what the Latins call grossi, that is, figs not yet ripe. For grossi Tertullian renders its sour fruit; the Vulgate has its green figs, but Tertullian's rendering is practically the same interpretation. For olynthos or grossus is nothing but a fig still hard and sour. Theodore Gaza, in his work on plants, calls the wild fig olynthos. Rhenanus. — The fig tree loses its sour fruit. Its green figs. Rigault.

(printed under page 131)

(76) ‹anchor: etiam mare hactenus› · call in col 253

(printed under page 131) (76) Et jam mare hactenus. Hoc est, Non erit amplius. Sic supra, de coelo, nusquam fiet. Sic lib. de Pallio: Hactenus Sodoma. Rig. — Etiam mare hactenus. Alii pro hactenus habent Oceanus, sensus tunc, esset, Etiam Oceanus iis deerit, sed non insolens ea vox est hactenus Tertulliano, qua utitur pro, jam non est aut erit. Le Pr.

And now the sea, thus far. That is, it will be no more. So above, of heaven, it will be nowhere. So in the book On the Pallium: Sodom, thus far. Rigault. — Even the sea, thus far. Others have Oceanus in place of hactenus; the sense would then be: even the Ocean will fail them. But the word hactenus is not unusual in Tertullian, who uses it for now is not, or will not be. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 131)

Page

running head: 253 LIBER ADV. HERMOGE (cut off at image edge)
marginal letters: A et ex materia non constat; B CAPUT XXXIV. / Caeterum, omne ex nihilo; C stellae quidem de caelo ruent; D beside commentary note (74), not in the text
old-edition numerals: (none)
other: ligature doubt raised by the check (text not changed): caelum convolvetur | coelum convolvetur
other: ligature doubt raised by the check (text not changed): Caelum et terra | Coelum et terra
other: ligature doubt raised by the check (text not changed): Caelum primum | Coelum primum
other: ligature doubt raised by the check (text not changed): caeli et ipsi | coeli et ipsi
other: ligature doubt raised by the check (text not changed): de caelo ruent | de coelo ruent

PL 2:254

alii similitudinem de suo praestare, nisi sit ipsum quod tali similitudine praestet. Revertor igitur ad causam definientem omnia ex nihilo edita, in nihilum perventura. Ex aeterno enim, id est ex materia, nihil Deus interibile fecisset, nec ex majoribus minora condidisset, cui magis congruat ex minoribus majora producere, id est ex interibili aeternum, quod et carni nostrae pollicetur, cujus virtutis et potestatis suae hunc jam arrhabonem voluit in nobis collocasse, ut credamus etiam illum universitatem ex nihilo velut emortuam, quae scilicet non erat, in hoc ut esset, suscitasse.

furnish to another a likeness out of its own, unless it be itself that which it furnishes by such a likeness. I return therefore to the principle which defines that all things brought forth out of nothing will come to nothing. For out of the eternal, that is, out of matter, God would have made nothing perishable, nor would He have formed lesser things out of greater, He to Whom it is more fitting to produce greater things out of lesser, that is, the eternal out of the perishable, which He also promises to our flesh, of which power and might of His He has willed to have already placed this pledge in us, so that we may believe that He also raised up the universe out of nothing as though dead, since indeed it did not exist, to this end, that it might exist.

CAPUT XXXV.

Chapter XXXV.

De caetero vero statu materiae, etsi non est retractandum, prius enim erat ut eam esse constaret, tamen ac si constiterit, persequendus est ordo: quo magis eam non esse cunstet, cujus nec reliquus status consistat, simul ut contrarietates suas agnoscat Hermogenes. Prima, inquit, facie videtur nobis incorporalis esse materia: exquisita autem ratione recta, invenitur neque corporalis, neque incorporalis. Quae est ista ratio recta, quae nihil recti renuntiat, id est nihil certi? Nisi fallor enim, omnis res aut corporalis aut incorporalis sit necesse est (ut concedam interim esse aliquid incorporale de substantiis duntaxat, cum ipsa substantia corpus sit rei cujusque) certe post corporale et incorporale nihil tertium. Age nunc sit et tertiam, quod illa recta ratio Hermogeniana compererit, quae neque corporalem neque incorporalem materiam facit: ubi est? quale est? quid vocatur? quid describitur? quid intelligitur? Tantum hoc ratio renuntiavit, nec corporalem materiam nec incorporalem.

But concerning the remaining condition of matter, although it is not to be gone over again (for it first had to be established that it exists), nevertheless, as if it had been established, the order must be followed through, so that it may be the more established that it does not exist, since not even its remaining condition holds together, and at the same time that Hermogenes may recognize his own contradictions. At first sight, he says, matter seems to us to be incorporeal; but when right reason is carefully applied, it is found to be neither corporeal nor incorporeal. What is this right reason, which declares nothing right, that is, nothing certain? For unless I am mistaken, every thing must necessarily be either corporeal or incorporeal (to grant for the moment that there is something incorporeal, at least among substances, since substance itself is the body of each thing); certainly after the corporeal and the incorporeal there is no third. Come now, let there be even a third, which that right reason of Hermogenes has discovered, which makes matter neither corporeal nor incorporeal: where is it? what sort of thing is it? what is it called? how is it described? how is it understood? Reason has declared only this, that matter is neither corporeal nor incorporeal.

CAPUT XXXVI.

Chapter XXXVI.

Sed ecce contrarium subjicit, aut alia fortasse ratio ei occurit, ex parte corporalem renuntians materiam, et ex parte incorporalem. Jam ergo ne neutrum

But see, he puts forward the contrary, or perhaps another reason has occurred to him, declaring matter to be in part corporeal and in part incorporeal. Now therefore, lest neither

Editors' notes and page, col. 254

Page

running head: ADV. HERMOGENEM.
marginal letters: A ‹alii similitudinem de suo praestare›; B ‹De caetero vero statu materiae›; C ‹hil tertium. Age nunc sit et tertiam›; D ‹editio Vulgata habet grossos suos (in the Commentarius at page foot)›
old-edition numerals: 230 after ‹aut›

PL 2:255

sit, utrumque materia censenda est? Erit enim corporalis et incorporalis adversus renuntiationem rectae rationis illius, plane rationem non reddentis sententiae suae sicut nec alia reddit. Corporale enim materiae vult esse, de quo corpora edantur; incorporale vero, inconditum motum ejus. Si enim, ait, corpus tantummodo esset, nihil ei incorporale apparet, id est motus. Si vero in totum incorporalis fuisset, nullum corpus ex ea fieret. Quanto haec rectior ratio! nisi quod si tam rectas lineas ducis, Hermogenes, quam ratio ista pictor te bardior non est. Quis enim tibi concedit motum in secundam partem substantiae deputare? cum substantiva res non sit, quia nec corporalis; sed accidens si forte. substantiae et corporis, ut actus, et pulsus, ut lapsus, ut casus, ita et motus. Nam sive a semetipso quid movetur, actus ejus est motus, certe pars substantiae non est sicut tu motum substantiam facis materiae incorporalem. Omnia denique moventur aut a semetipsis, ut animalia; aut ab aliis, ut inanimalia: tamen nec hominem, nec lapidem corporalem et incorporalem dicimus, quia et corpus habeat et motum, sed unam omnibus formam solius corporalitatis, quae substantiae res est: si qua incorporalia eis adsunt, aut actus, aut passiones, aut officia, aut libidines eorum, non portiones deputamus. Quod ergo facit, portionem materiae in motum disponere, qui non ab substantiam pertinet, sed ad substantiae habitum? Quid enim si immobilem placuisse tibi inducere materiam numquid immobilitas secunda pars formae videretur? Sic itaque nec motus: sed de motu et alibi licebit.

be the case, must matter be reckoned both? For it will be corporeal and incorporeal, against the declaration of that right reason of his, plainly giving no reason for his opinion, just as he gives none for other things either. For he wants the corporeal part of matter to be that from which bodies are produced; but the incorporeal, its disordered motion. For if, he says, it were only body, nothing incorporeal appears in it, that is, motion. But if it had been wholly incorporeal, no body would come into being from it. How much more correct this reasoning is! except that if you draw lines as straight as this reasoning, Hermogenes, no painter is duller than you. For who grants you to assign motion to a second part of the substance? since it is not a substantial thing, because it is not corporeal either; but an accident, if anything, of substance and of body, as action, and impulse, as a slip, as a fall, so also motion. For even if something is moved by itself, its motion is its action, certainly not a part of its substance, as you make motion the incorporeal substance of matter. In short, all things are moved either by themselves, as living creatures, or by others, as inanimate things; yet we call neither a man nor a stone corporeal and incorporeal because it has both body and motion, but [we ascribe] to all one form of corporeality alone, which is the thing proper to substance: if any incorporeal things are present to them, either their actions, or passions, or functions, or desires, we do not reckon them as portions. What then does it accomplish to assign a portion of matter to motion, which pertains not to the substance but to the condition of the substance? For what if it had pleased you to introduce immobile matter, would immobility seem to be a second part of its form? So then neither is motion: but about motion it will be possible [to speak] elsewhere too.

CAPUT XXXVII.

Chapter XXXVII.

Nunc enim video te ad aliam rursus rationem reverti, quae tibi nihil certi renuntiare consuevit. Nam sicut nec corporalem nec incorporalem infers materiam, ita nec bonam nec malam allegas: et proinde superargumentans: «Si enim, inquis, esset bona quae semper hoc fuerat, non desideraret compositionem Dei: si esset natura mala,

For now I see you returning again to another line of reasoning, which has been accustomed to report nothing certain to you. For just as you infer matter to be neither corporeal nor incorporeal, so you allege it to be neither good nor evil; and accordingly, arguing further: "For if, you say, it were good, which it had always been, it would not desire the ordering of God; if it were evil by nature,

Editors' notes and page, col. 255

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ⁹² ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Pamel. Fran. Paris. Rigalt. sic legunt; alii male, reciprocationis, reparationis.

Pamelius, the Franeker and Paris editions and Rigault read so; others wrongly "of reciprocation," "of reparation."

⁹³ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Rationi satis Rhen. Seml. et Oberth. vel mendorum sequax; alii ratiocinariae Jun. Ratio ista est alii.

"Enough for reason": Rhenanus, Semler, and Oberthür, ever the follower of errors; others ratiocinariae ("of reckoning"), Junius; "this reason is": others.

⁹⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Inanimata Pamel. e cod. Vatic.

Inanimata ("inanimate"): Pamelius, from the Vatican codex.

⁹⁵ ‹anchor: si qua incorporalia› · call in col 255 Incorpora Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

Incorpora ("bodiless things"): Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

⁹⁶ ‹anchor: et alibi licebit› · call in col 255 (the call is printed "90" in the text) Liquebit Rhen.

Liquebit ("it will be clear"): Rhenanus.

⁹⁷ ‹anchor: ad aliam› · call in col 255 Illam Rhen.

Illam ("that"): Rhenanus.

⁹⁸ ‹anchor: Nam sicut› · call in col 255 Sicut Fran. Par.

Sicut ("just as"): Franeker and Paris editions.

⁹⁹ ‹anchor: inferi› · call in col 255 Infert Seml.

Infert ("he brings in"): Semler.

¹ ‹anchor: allegas› · call in col 255 Adlegasset.

Adlegasset ("had alleged").

² ‹anchor: superargumentans› · call in col 255 Superargumentasset Seml. Oberth. Super argumentas. Sed enim si Rhen.

Superargumentasset ("had argued further"): Semler, Oberthür. "You argue further. But indeed if": Rhenanus.

³ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible In vanum Fran.

"In vain": the Franeker edition.

⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Retractavimus Rhen. Seml.

Retractavimus ("we have reconsidered"): Rhenanus, Semler.

⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Aut bona, aut mala iidem.

"Either good or evil": the same.

⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Nec hic Rhen. et sequaces.

"Nor here": Rhenanus and his followers.

⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Apponens ostendit edit. Rhen. eodem sensu.

"Setting beside, he shows": Rhenanus's edition, in the same sense.

⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Et additur Rhen. Seml. et aliis.

Et ("and") is added in Rhenanus, Semler and others.

⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Si autem Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

Si autem ("but if"): Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

¹⁰ ‹anchor: aut non capit› · call in col 256 Cupit male cod. Wouw.

Cupit ("desires"): the codex, Wouwer, wrongly.

¹¹ ‹anchor: comparas Deum› · call in col 256 Dominum Rhen. Seml. Pamel.

Dominum ("the Lord"): Rhenanus, Semler, Pamelius.

¹² ‹anchor: et edomari› · call in col 256 Melius potuisset Rhen. Seml.

"Could have better": Rhenanus, Semler.

¹³ ‹anchor: de motu› · call in col 256 De moto Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

De moto ("about the moved"): Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 132)

(77) ‹anchor: Quanto haec rectior ratio› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 132) (77) Quanto haec rectior ratio? nisi quod si tam rectas lineas ducis Hermogenes. Ubi est annotanda proverbialis formula, a pictorum arte, qualis erat Hermogenes, mutuata, rectas lineas ducere, qualis est etiam illa, ultra lineam. Pam.

How much straighter is this reasoning? Unless, Hermogenes, you draw lines so straight. Here note the proverbial phrase borrowed from the art of painters, such as Hermogenes was, to draw straight lines; as is also beyond the line. Pamelius.

(printed under page 132)

(78) ‹anchor: Ut inanimalia› · call not visible

(printed under page 132) (78) Ut inanimalia. Vatic. cod. mss. inanimata, sed illud nolui immutare, quod eadem reperiantur infra c. XCIV et ejusmodi obsoletis vocibus uti soleat auctor, qualis est etiam illa, corporalitatis, et incorpora. Pam.

As inanimate things. The Vatican manuscript codex has inanimata, but I did not want to change the other, because the same word is found below in chapter 94, and the author is accustomed to use obsolete words of this kind, such as corporalitatis ("of corporality") and incorpora ("bodiless things"). Pamelius.

(printed under page 132)

(79) ‹anchor: aut libidines eorum› · call in col 255

(printed under page 132) (79) Aut libidines eorum. Ligidicius vocat appetitus et inclinationes. Sic in lib. de Patientia: « Ut cum, inquit, inter sese variis sectarum libidinibus et sententiarum aemulationibus discordent. » Libidinibus, dest. studiis. Rhen.

Or their desires. He [Ligidicius, as printed] calls appetites and inclinations [so]. So in the book On Patience: "As when," he says, "they are at odds among themselves through the various desires of their sects and the rivalries of their opinions." Libidinibus, that is [printed dest.], pursuits. Rhenanus.

(printed under page 132)

(80) ‹anchor: et alibi licebit› · call in col 255, printed "(96)" in the text

(printed under page 132) (80) Sed de motu et alibi licebit. Subauditur disputare, nisi est licebit, pro liquebit, ut in praecedentibus lib. licuit, pro, liquit, id est, liquidum evasit. Rhen.

But about motion it will be allowed elsewhere too. To discuss is understood; unless licebit stands for liquebit ("it will be clear"), as in the preceding books licuit for liquit, that is, "it became clear." Rhenanus.

(printed under page 132) (81) Quam quantum proprie pictor. Sic omnino hic locus; nam quantum capitur pro in quantum, ut nihil sit opus eam vocem praetermittere. Pam.

Which, as far as a painter properly. So this passage certainly runs; for quantum is taken for in quantum ("in so far as"), so that there is no need to leave that word out. Pamelius.

(printed under page 132)

Page

running head: TERTULLIANI OPERUM PARS II. — (cut off at right edge)
marginal letters: A trum sit, utrumque materia censenda est?; B sus, ut casus, ita et motus; C enim si immobilem placuisse tibi; D (77) Quanto haec rectior ratio (in the commentary)
old-edition numerals: 921 after adsunt,

PL 2:256

non accepisset translationem in melius: nec quicquam compositionis suae applicuisset illi Deus tali natura: in vacuum enim laborasset. » Verba haec tua sunt: quorum te et alibi meminisse oportuerat, ne quid his contrarium inferres. Sed quoniam de mali et boni ambiguitate super materiam in praeteritis aliquid tractavimus, nunc ad praesentem et solam propositionem et argumentationem tuam respondebo. Nec dicam, et hic te certum aliquid debuisse pronuntiasse aut bonam, aut malam aut tertium aliquid: sed de his quod tibi libuit pronuntiasse, custodisse. Rescindis enim quod pronuntiasti nec bonam nec malam: quia cum dicis: Si esset bona, non desideraret componi a Deo, malam portendis: et cum apponis: Si esset mala natura, non admitteret in melius translationem, bonam subostendis: atque ita et boni et mali affinem constituisti, quam nec malam pronuntiasti Ut autem argumentationem, qua putasti te propositionem tuam confirmaturum, retundam, oppono etiam illud: Si bona fuisset materia semper, quare non desiderasset in melius reformari? Quod bonum, non desiderat, aut non optat, aut non capit profectum, ut fiat de bono melius? Aeque, si mala natura fuisset, quare non potuerit a Deo converti, ut a potentiore, ut ab eo qui lapidum quoque naturam convertere valeat in filios Abrahae? (Matth. III, 9.) Nempe ergo non tantum comparas Deum materiae, sed et subjicis, a quo natura materiae devinci et edomari in melius non potuisset. Sed et quam hic non vis natura malam, alibi te confessum negabis.

it would not have accepted a transfer into the better: nor would God have applied anything of His composition to it, being of such a nature: for He would have laboured in vain." These words are yours: which you ought to have remembered elsewhere too, so as not to bring forward anything contrary to them. But since we have treated something in what went before about the ambiguity of evil and good concerning matter, I shall now respond to your present and sole proposition and argumentation. Nor shall I say that here too you ought to have pronounced something certain, either good or evil or some third thing; but that you ought to have kept to what it pleased you to pronounce concerning these. For you rescind what you pronounced, neither good nor evil: since when you say, If it were good, it would not desire to be composed by God, you portend it evil; and when you add, If it were of an evil nature, it would not admit a transfer into the better, you hint that it is good: and thus you have made it akin to both good and evil, which you pronounced not evil. But in order to blunt the argumentation by which you thought you would confirm your proposition, I oppose this also: If matter had always been good, why would it not have desired to be reformed into the better? What good thing does not desire, or does not wish, or does not admit of progress, so that from good it may become better? Equally, if it had been of an evil nature, why could it not have been converted by God, as by one more powerful, as by Him Who is able to convert even the nature of stones into sons of Abraham? (Matt. 3:9). Surely, then, you not only compare God with matter, but also subject Him to it, since by Him the nature of matter could not have been overcome and tamed into the better. But also, that which here you will not have evil by nature, you will deny that you have confessed elsewhere.

CAPUT XXXVIII.

Chapter XXXVIII.

De situ materiae id tracto, quod et de motu, ut perversitatem tuam traducat. Subjacentem facis Deo materiam, et utique locum illi qui sit infra Deum. In loco, ergo materia. Si in loco, ergo intra locum: si intra locum, ergo determinatur a loco, intra quem est: si determinatur, habet lineam extremam, quam, quantum proprie pictor, agnoscis finem esse omni rei, cujus linea extrema est. Non ergo erit infinita materia,

Concerning the situation of matter I treat this, which [I treated] also concerning motion, so that it may expose your perversity. You make matter lie beneath God, and certainly [you give] it a place which is below God. In a place, therefore, is matter. If in a place, then within a place: if within a place, then it is bounded by the place within which it is: if it is bounded, it has an outermost line, which, inasmuch as you are properly a painter, you recognize to be the end for every thing of which there is an outermost line. Therefore matter will not be infinite,

Editors' notes and page, col. 256

Footnotes

(81) ‹anchor: quantum proprie pictor› · call in col 256

(printed under page 132)

Page

running head: UM PARS II. — SERIES I, POLEMICA. 256 (left part cut off at image edge)
marginal letters: A non accepisset translationem; B tura, non admitteret in melius; C et edomari in melius; D tus et inclinationes (in the Commentarius)
old-edition numerals: 232 after reformari? (bold numeral, reading uncertain)

PL 2:257

quae dum in loco est, a loco determinatur, et dum determinatur ab illo, extrema eum linea patitur. At tu infinitatem facis, dicens : Infinita est autem, eo quod semper est. Et si quis discipulorum tuorum voluerit argumentari, quasi infinitatem aevo, non modo corporis intelligi velis : atquin corporaliter immensam et incircumscriptam, sequentia ostendunt. Unde inquis, nec tota fabricatur, sed partes ejus. Adeo, corpore infinita, non tempore est. Et obduceris corpore eam infinitam faciens, cum locum ei adscribens, intra locum et extremam loci lineam includis. Sed tamen, cur non totam eam formaverit Deus, non scio nisi qua aut invalidus, aut invidus. Itaque dimidium ejus quae non tota formata sit quaero ut qualis tota fuerit agnoscam. Debuerat enim Deus exemplarium antiquitatis ad gloriam operis palam fecisse.

which, while it is in a place, is bounded by the place, and while it is bounded by it, it is subject to an outer limit. But you make it infinite, saying: "But it is infinite, because it always exists." And if any of your disciples should wish to argue that you mean its infinity to be understood in respect of duration, not in the manner of body, yet the passages that follow show that it is bodily immense and uncircumscribed. "Hence," you say, "neither is the whole of it fashioned, but parts of it." So then it is infinite in body, not in time. And you are refuted when you make it infinite in body, since by assigning it a place you enclose it within a place and the outer limit of that place. But still, why God did not form the whole of it I do not know, unless because He was either powerless or envious. Therefore I ask for the half of that which was not wholly formed, that I may recognize what the whole was like. For God ought to have made public the exemplar of its antiquity, for the glory of His work.

CAPUT XXXIX.

Chapter XXXIX.

Sic nunc definitiva, sicut rectius tibi videtur, per demutationes suas et translationes; sit et comprehensibilis, ut quae fabricatur, inquis, a Deo, quia et convertibilis, et demutabilis, et dispartibilis. Demutationes enim ejus, inquis, dispartibilem eam ostendunt. Et hic a lineis tuis excidisti, quibus circa personam Dei usus es, praescribens Deum illam non ex semetipso fecisse, quia in partes venire nou posset qui sit aeternus et manens in aevum, ac per hoc immutabilis et indivisibilis. Si et materia eadem aeternitate censetur, neque intium habens neque finem, eadem ratione non poterit pati dispertitionem et demutationem, qua nec Deus. In aeternitatis consortio posita, particibet cum illo necesse est et vires, et leges et conditiones aeternitatis. Aeque cum dicis : Partes autem ejus omnia simul ex omnibus habent, ut ex partibus totum dignoscatur : utique eas partes intelligi vis, quae ex illa prolatae sunt, quae hodic videntur

So now let it be definite, as seems more correct to you, through its changes and transpositions; let it also be comprehensible, as being fashioned, you say, by God, because it is both convertible and changeable and divisible. "For its changes," you say, "show it to be divisible." And here you have strayed from your own lines, which you used concerning the person of God, laying down that God did not make it out of Himself, because He Who is eternal and abiding for ever could not come into parts, and is for that reason immutable and indivisible. If matter too is reckoned with the same eternity, having neither beginning nor end, by the same reasoning it will not be able to undergo division and change, any more than God can. Placed in the fellowship of eternity, it must needs share with Him the powers, the laws and the conditions of eternity. Likewise when you say: "But its parts have all things together from all, so that the whole may be discerned from the parts," surely you mean those parts to be understood which have been brought forth from it, which today are seen

Editors' notes and page, col. 257

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ¹⁴ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible In loco quo Rhen. et alii seqq.

"In the place in which": Rhenanus and the others who follow.

¹⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible In quo est addit Jun.

Junius adds "in which it is."

¹⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Infinitam Rhen. Pamel.

Infinitam ("infinite"): Rhenanus, Pamelius.

¹⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Aevo. non motu Fran.

"By age, not by motion": the Franeker edition.

¹⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Ut corporaliter Rhen. Fran.

"As corporeally": Rhenanus, Franeker edition.

¹⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Ut additur a nonnullis.

Ut ("as") is added by some.

²⁰ ‹anchor: Deum illam› · call in col 257 Deum illum Rhen. Seml.

"That God": Rhenanus, Semler.

²¹ ‹anchor: qua› · call in col 257 Quam volebat Rhen.

Rhenanus wanted quam ("which," accusative).

²² ‹anchor: cum illo› · call in col 257 Eum illi Rhen. Seml.

"Him to it": Rhenanus, Semler.

²³ ‹anchor: Aeque› · call in col 257 Atque Rhen. Seml. Pamel.

Atque ("and"): Rhenanus, Semler, Pamelius.

²⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Utique deterioribus Rhen. Jun.

"Certainly to the worse": Rhenanus, Junius.

²⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Est alterius, i. e. Rhen. Seml.

"Is of another, that is": Rhenanus, Semler.

²⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Disposita jam et contempta Rhen. qui legendum putabat concepta.

"Already disposed and despised": Rhenanus, who thought concepta ("conceived") should be read.

²⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Tetrum Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

Tetrum ("foul"): Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

²⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible κόσμος, annotavit. Seml.

Kosmos ("world, ornament"), Semler noted.

²⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Praefert Rhen. solus cum seqq.

Praefert ("he shows"): Rhenanus alone, with those who follow.

³⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Fabricatam ibid.

Fabricatam ("built"): in the same place.

³¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Et confugi et mihi computum Rhenanus qui mendum agnovit ac proposuit lectionem quam omnes suam fecerunt.

"And I have fled for refuge, and a reckoning for me": Rhenanus, who recognized the error and proposed the reading that all have made their own.

³² ‹anchor: similitudinem apponis› · call in col 258 Oppones Rhen. Seml. Obert.

Oppones ("you will set against"): Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

³³ ‹anchor: nec cacabaeius› · call in col 258 Cacabatius Paris.; cacabaceus Fran.

Cacabatius: the Paris edition; cacabaceus: the Franeker edition [both: "pot-like, seething like a cooking-pot"].

³⁴ ‹anchor: temperatus› · call in col 258 Temporatur mss. Jun.

Temporatur: the manuscripts, Junius.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 133)

(82) ‹anchor: Et obduceris› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 133) (82) Et obduceris. Monuimus ante non semel obducere et obduci Tertulliano esse refellere et refelli, sive contraria, ac inter se pugnantia asserentem captum teneri vel tenere. Rhen. — Et obduceris. Ita ut evadere non possis. Rig.

And you are confuted. We have noted more than once before that for Tertullian obducere and obduci mean to refute and be refuted, or to hold, or be held caught, as one who asserts contrary and mutually conflicting things. Rhenanus. — And you are confuted. So that you cannot escape. Rigault.

(printed under page 133)

(83) ‹anchor: Exemplarium antiquitatis› · call not visible

(printed under page 133) (83) Exemplarium antiquitatis. Intelligit exemplar. Sic paulo post: « Et vis meliora deteriorum exemplarium ferre. » Non aliter adversus Valentinianos usurpat sigillarium pro sigillari. Rig.

Of the pattern of antiquity. He means a pattern [exemplar]. So a little later: "And you would have the better things bear the pattern of the worse." Not otherwise in Against the Valentinians he uses sigillarium for sigillare ("figurine"). Rigault.

(printed under page 133)

(84) ‹anchor: dispartibilem eam ostendunt› · call in col 257

(printed under page 133) (84) Dispartibilem eam ostendunt. Hoc est divisibilem, quod tamen cum superioribus Hermogenis verbis non congruit. Dicebat enim Deum materiam ex seipso fuisse, qui tamen aeternus erat et indivisibilis; nunc vero materiam illam divisibilem putat, atque secum ita pugnat. Le Pr.

They show it to be separable. That is, divisible; which, however, does not agree with Hermogenes' earlier words. For he said that God, who was nonetheless eternal and indivisible, was matter of himself; but now he thinks that matter divisible, and so contradicts himself. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 133)

(85) ‹anchor: a lineis tuis excidisti› · call in col 257

(printed under page 133) (85) A lineis tuis excidisti. A scopo aberrasti. Neque puto allusisse hic ad artem pictoris illius; cum enim id intelligi queat satis commode non recurrendo ad illam allusionem, crederem id Tertulliano indignum in eo semper immorari. Le Pr.

You have fallen from your lines. You have wandered from the mark. Nor do I think he alluded here to that man's painter's art; for since it can be understood conveniently enough without recourse to that allusion, I should think it unworthy of Tertullian to be forever dwelling on it. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 133)

(86) ‹anchor: Nemo se apud tonsorem› · call not visible

(printed under page 133) (86) Nemo se apud tonsorem, etc. Ad morem respicit, quo speculo uti solent tonsores; nam et addit, ut speculum sit mundus materiae, a quo etiam novam vocem, speciatum derivavit auctor, pro eo quod in speculo speciosum apparet: « Nam et speculum, » inquit Varro de ling. Lat. lib. IV, « a speciendo, quod ibi spectent. » Pam.

No one at the barber's [admires] himself, etc. He has in view the custom by which barbers use a mirror; for he adds that the world of matter is a mirror, from which the author also derived a new word, speciatum, for what appears comely in a mirror. "For speculum too," says Varro, On the Latin Language, book 4, "is from specere, because they look there." Pamelius.

(printed under page 133)

Page

running head: 257 LIBER ADV. HERMOGEN[EM] (cut off at right edge)
marginal letters: A quae dum in loco est; B exemplarium antiquitatis; C que intium habens neque finem; D (82) Et obduceris (in the commentary at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: 228 after demutationes

PL 2:258

a nobis. Quomodo ergo omnia ex omnibus habent, utique ex pristinis, quando quae hodie videntur, aliter habeant quam pristina fuerunt?

by us. How then do all things derive from all things, namely from the former ones, when the things that are seen today are otherwise than the former things were?

CAPUT XL.

Chapter XL.

Dicis in melius reformatam materiam, utique de deterioribus: et vis meliora deteriorum exemplarium ferre. Confusa res erat, nunc vero composita est: et vis ex compositis incomposita praeberi. Nulla res speculum alterius rei, id est non coaequalis. Nemo se apud tonsorem pro homine mulum inspexit, nisi si qui putat in hac exstructione mundi, dispositae jam et comptae, informem et incultam materiam respondere. Quid hodie informe in mundo, quid retro spectatum in materia, ut speculum sit mundus materiae? Cum ornamenti nomine sit penes Graecos mundus, quomodo inornatae materiae imaginem refert, ut dicas totum ejus partibus cognosci? Certe ex illo toto erit etiam hoc, quod non venit in deformationem. Et supra edidisti non totam eam fabricatum. Igitur vel hoc rude et confusum et incompositum non potest in expolitis et distinctis et compositis recognosci, quae nec partes materiae appellari convenit, cum a forma ejus ex mutatione divisa recesserunt.

You say that matter was reformed for the better, namely out of worse things; and you want the better to bear [the likeness] of the worse exemplars. The thing was confused, but now it is ordered; and you want disordered things to be displayed from ordered ones. No thing is the mirror of another thing, that is, of one not its equal. No one at the barber's has looked at himself as a mule instead of a man, unless someone thinks that in this construction of the world, now arranged and adorned, formless and uncultivated matter is reflected. What is formless in the world today, what was formerly beheld in matter, that the world should be the mirror of matter? Since among the Greeks the world bears the name of ornament, how does it reproduce the image of unadorned matter, so that you may say that its whole is known from its parts? Certainly, of that whole there will also be this part which did not come into the fashioning. And above you declared that it was not fashioned in its entirety. Therefore even this rough and confused and disordered part cannot be recognized in things polished and distinct and ordered, which it is not even fitting to call parts of matter, since they have departed from its form, separated by the change.

CAPUT XLI.

Chapter XLI.

Revertor ad motum, ut ubique te lubricum ostendam. Inconditus, et confusus, et turbulentus fuit materiae motus. Sic enim et ollae undique ebullientis similitudinem apponis. Et quomodo alibi alius a te adfirmatur? cum enim vis materiam nec bonam nec malam inducere. Igitur, subjacens materia aequalis momenti habens motum, neque ad bonum, neque ad malum plurimum vergit. Si aequalis momenti, jam non turbulentus, nec cacabacius, sed compositus et temperatus; scilicet, qui inter bonum et malum suo arbitrio agitatus, in neutram tamen

I return to the motion, so that I may show you slippery everywhere. Unordered, and confused, and turbulent was the motion of matter. For so you also apply the comparison of a pot boiling over on every side. And how is another [motion] asserted by you elsewhere? when indeed you want to present matter as neither good nor evil. Therefore matter, lying beneath and having a motion of equal balance, inclines for the most part neither to good nor to evil. If of equal balance, then it is not turbulent, nor seething like a pot, but ordered and tempered; that is, one which, though driven by its own choice between good and evil, nevertheless towards neither

Editors' notes and page, col. 258

Page

running head: ADV. HERMOGENEM. (initial A cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A dentur a nobis; B ornamenti nomine; C militudinem apponis; D tat, atque secum (commentary)
old-edition numerals: 234 after refert

PL 2:259

partem pronus et praeceps, mediae, quod aiunt, aginae aequilibrato impetu ferebatur. Haec, inquies, non est, haec turbulentia et passivitas non est; sed moderatio, et modestia, et justitia motationis neutram in partem inclinantis. Plane, si huc et illuc, aut in alterum magis proclinaret, tunc inconcinnitatis, et turbulentiae denotari mereretur. Porro, si neque ad bonum, neque ad malum pronior erat motus, utique inter bonum et malum agebatur: ut ex hoc quoque materiam determinabilem adpareat, cujus motus nec malo nec bono pronus, eo quod in neutrum vergebat intra utrumque ab utroque pendebat, et hoc nomine ab utroque determinabatur. Sed et bonum et malum in loco facis, cum dicis motum materiae in neutrum eorum fuisse propensum: materia enim quae in loco erat, neque huc neque illuc devergens, in loca non devergebat, in quibus erat bonum et malum. Dans autem locum bono et malo, corporalia ea facis, faciendo localia; quia quae locum habent, prius est ut corporalia sint. Denique incorporalia proprium locum non haberent, nisi in corpore, cum corpori accidunt. Ad bonum autem et malum non devergente materia, ut aut corporalia aut localia non devergebat. Bonum ergo et malum, erras, si substantias esse vis. Substantias enim facis quibus loca assignas. Loca autem assignas, cum materiae motum ab utraque regione suspendis.

side inclined and headlong, was carried along with an impulse balanced, as the saying goes, at the middle of the pivot-socket. This is not restlessness, this is not turbulence and passivity; but the moderation and modesty and justice of a motion inclining to neither side. Plainly, if it inclined this way and that, or more towards one side, then it would deserve to be branded with incongruity and turbulence. Moreover, if the motion was inclined neither towards good nor towards evil, it was certainly carried on between good and evil: so that from this too matter appears to be bounded, since its motion, inclined neither to evil nor to good, because it verged towards neither, hung within both from both, and on this account was bounded by both. But you also put good and evil in a place, when you say that the motion of matter was inclined towards neither of them: for matter, which was in a place, verging neither this way nor that, did not verge towards the places in which good and evil were. But in giving a place to good and evil, you make them corporeal by making them local; because things that have place must first be corporeal. Indeed incorporeal things would have no proper place except in a body, when they happen to a body. But since matter did not verge towards good and evil, it did not verge [towards them] either as corporeal or as local things. You err, then, if you will have good and evil to be substances. For you make substances of those things to which you assign places. And you assign places when you suspend the motion of matter from both regions.

CAPUT XLII.

Chapter XLII.

Dispersisti omnia, ne de proximo quam contraria sibi sint relucerent. At ego colligam singula, et conferam. Inconditum adseveras motum materiae, eaemque adjicis sectari informitatem: debinc alibi, desiderare componi a Deo. Desiderat formationem quae sectatur informitatem, aut sectatur informitatem quae desiderat formationem? Non vis videri Deum aequari materiae, et subjicis habere illam cum Deo communionem. Impossibile enim, inquis, non habentem illam commune aliquid cum Deo, ornari eam ab ipso. Atquin, si commune aliquid habebat cum Deo, non desiderabat exornari

You have scattered everything about, lest it should shine out from close at hand how contrary to one another they are. But I will gather the particulars together and compare them. You assert that the motion of matter was disordered, and you add that it pursued formlessness; then elsewhere, that it desired to be set in order by God. Does that which pursues formlessness desire formation, or does that which desires formation pursue formlessness? You do not wish God to seem to be made equal to matter, and you add that it has communion with God. For it is impossible, you say, that, not having anything in common with God, it should be adorned by Him. And yet, if it had something in common with God, it did not desire to be adorned

Editors' notes and page, col. 259

Footnotes

(87) ‹anchor: Mediae, quod aiunt, aginae› · call not visible on the foot images

(printed under page 134) (87) Mediae, quod aiunt, aginae. Is motus scilicet qui adeo temperatus ut nullam in partem vergat, parsque nulla praeponderet. Est enim, ut docet Festus, agina foramen cui inseritur et in quo vertitur scapus trutinae. Le Pr.

Of the middle, as they say, of the pivot-hole. That is, the motion so balanced that it leans to no side and no part outweighs the other. For agina, as Festus teaches, is the hole into which the beam of a balance is inserted and in which it turns. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 134)

(88) ‹anchor: Haec turbulentia et passivitas› · call not visible

(printed under page 134) (88) Haec turbulentia et passivitas. In vetustis exemplaribus legitur turbulenta. Verum magis placet turbulentia. Quid passivum vocet Tertullianus, multis in locis, prout res tulit, adnotavimus. Hic passivitatem vocat dissolutionem, sive inordinationem atque confusionem. Rhen.

This turbulence and passivity. In the old copies one reads turbulenta. But turbulentia is preferable. What Tertullian calls passivum we have noted in many places, as the matter required. Here he calls dissolution, or disorder and confusion, passivitas. Rhenanus.

(printed under page 134)

(89) ‹anchor: Justitia motationis› · call not visible

(printed under page 134) (89) Justitia motationis. Sic initio libri de Pallio, Justitiam pallii dixit. Rig.

The justness of the motion. So at the start of the book On the Pallium he spoke of the justness of the pallium. Rigault.

(printed under page 134)

(90) ‹anchor: Nec malo nec bono pronus› · call not visible

(printed under page 134) (90) Nec malo nec bono pronus. Hoc est, neque ad malum, neque ad bonum pronus. Pronus cum dativo. Rhen.

Inclined neither to evil nor to good. That is, inclined neither towards evil nor towards good. Pronus with the dative. Rhenanus.

(printed under page 134)

Page

running head: 259 TERTULLIANI OPERUM PARS II. — (cut off at the image edge)
marginal letters: A partem pronus et praeceps; B teriae in neutrum eorum fuisse propensum; C beside CAPUT XLII. (between columns); D in the Commentarius at the page foot, beside (87) Mediae, quod aiunt
old-edition numerals: 225 after pendebat

PL 2:260

ab ipso, pars scilicet Dei per communionem. Aut et Deus poterat ornari a materia, habendo cum illa aliquid et ipse commune; et jam in hoc necessitati subjicis Deum, si fuit ali⟨q⟩uid in materia propter quod eam formaret. Comm⟨u⟩ne autem inter illos facis, quod a semetipsis et semper moventur. Quid minus materiae quam Deo adscribis? Totum consortium divinitatis hoc erit, libertas et aeternitas motus. Sed Deus composite, materia incondite moventur. Tamen divinum proinde, motu proinde, libero et aeterno. Atquin plus materiae das, cui licuit sic moveri quomodo Deo non licuit.

by Him, namely a part of God through communion. Or else God too could be adorned by matter, by Himself also having something in common with it; and already in this you subject God to necessity, if there was something in matter on account of which He should form it. Yet you make this common between them, that they are moved of themselves and always. What less do you ascribe to matter than to God? The whole partnership in divinity will be this: freedom and eternity of motion. But God is moved in an ordered way, matter in a disordered way. Yet it is divine all the same, with a motion likewise free and eternal. And yet you give more to matter, which was permitted to be moved in a way in which God was not permitted.

CAPUT XLIII.

Chapter XLIII.

De motu et illud notaverim. Nam, secundum ollae similitudinem, sic erat, inquis, materiae motus antequam disponeretur, concretus, inquietus, inapprehensibilis, prae nimietate certaminis. Dehinc subjicis: Stetit autem in Dei compositionem, et inapprehensibilem habuit conditum motum, prae tarditate inconditi motus. Supra certamen motui adscribis, hic tarditatem. Nam de natura materiae quoties cadas, accipe. Supra dicis: Si autem esset materia natura mala, non accepisset translationem in melius, nec Deus aliquid compositionis accommodasset illi; in vacuum enim laborasset. Finisti igitur duas sententias, nec materiam natura malam, nec naturam ejus a Deo potuisse converti. Horum immemor, postea infers: A⟨t⟩ ubi accepit compositionem a Deo et ornata est, cessavit a natura. Si in bonum reformata est, utique de malo reformata est; et si per compositionem Dei cessavit a natura mali, natura cessavit ergo, et mala fuit natura ante compositionem, et desinere potui a natura post reformationem.

On motion I would note this too. For, after the likeness of a pot, such, you say, was the motion of matter before it was set in order: congested, restless, ungraspable, because of the excess of its struggle. Then you add: But it came to a stand in God's composition, and had an ordered motion that was ungraspable, because of the slowness of the disordered motion. Above you ascribe struggle to the motion, here slowness. Now hear how often you stumble about the nature of matter. Above you say: If matter were evil by nature, it would not have received a change for the better, nor would God have fitted to it anything of composition; for He would have laboured in vain. You therefore settled two propositions: that matter is not evil by nature, and that its nature could not be changed by God. Forgetful of these, you afterwards bring in: But when it received composition from God and was adorned, it ceased from its nature. If it was reformed into good, surely it was reformed from evil; and if through God's composition it ceased from the nature of evil, then its nature ceased, and its nature was evil before the composition, and it was able to cease from its nature after the reformation.

CAPUT XLIV.

Chapter XLIV.

Sed et qualiter operatum facias Deum, sequitur ut ostendam. Plane a philosophis recedis, sed tamen et a prophetis. Stoici enim volunt Deum sic per materiam decucurrisse, quomodo mel per favos. At tu: Non, inquis, pertransiens illam facit mundum, sed solummodo apparens et appropinquans ei, sicut

But it follows that I should show also in what manner you make God to have worked. Clearly you depart from the philosophers, but also from the prophets. For the Stoics hold that God ran through matter just as honey runs through honeycombs. But you say: Not by passing through it does He make the world, but only by appearing and drawing near to it, just as

Editors' notes and page, col. 260

Footnotes

Variae lectiones (superscript numeral calls) ³⁵ ‹anchor: not visible on the page-foot image› · call not visible Praeceps mediat quod aiunt ginoten Rhen. Seml. Oberth. contra omnes.

"Headlong it mediates, as they say, ginoten": Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür, against all.

³⁶ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Terbulenta Rhen. contra omnes Semler conjicit delenda esse verba.

Terbulenta: Rhenanus, against all. Semler conjectures that the words should be deleted.

³⁷ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Nutationis Jun. mutationis Rhen.

Nutationis ("of nodding, swaying"): Junius; mutationis ("of change"): Rhenanus.

³⁸ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Judicantis Seml. Oberth.

Judicantis ("of one judging"): Semler, Oberthür.

³⁹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Proclivarunt Seml. contra omnes.

Proclivarunt ("they inclined"): Semler, against all.

⁴⁰ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Vertebat Rhen. Seml.

Vertebat ("it turned"): Rhenanus, Semler.

⁴¹ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Censebat Rhen. et ejus seqq. contra omnes.

Censebat ("he judged"): Rhenanus and his followers, against all.

⁴² ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Rhen. adjicit bisque legit moventur.

Rhenanus adds it, and twice reads moventur ("they are moved").

⁴³ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Erit Rhen. Seml.

Erit ("will be"): Rhenanus, Semler.

⁴⁴ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Inconditum Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

Inconditum ("disordered"): Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

⁴⁵ ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible Motus Rhen. et duo sequaces.

Motus ("motion"): Rhenanus and two followers.

⁴⁶ ‹anchor: quoties cadas, accipe› · call in col 260 Accipis supra judices Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

"You receive above as judges": Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

⁴⁷ ‹anchor: postea infers› · call in col 260 Inserens Rhen., contra omnes.

Inserens ("inserting"): Rhenanus, against all.

Commentarius (calls in parentheses) (printed under page 134)

Page

running head: ...UM PARS II. — SERIES I, POLEMICA. 260 (left part cut off at image edge)
marginal letters: A ab ipso, pars scilicet; B similitudinem, sic erat; C est, cessavit a natura; D multis in locis (beside the editors' commentary, not set)
old-edition numerals: 236 after motus
other: "scilicet" in line 1 looks like "scalicet/sealicet" in the bold type, set as scilicet, unsure; "aliquid", "Commune" and "At" have damaged letters; "et semper" faintly printed; full-width "Variae lectiones" apparatus and editors' "Commentarius" (notes 89, 90) at page foot not set

PL 2:261

facit qui decor solummodo apparens, et magnes lapis solummodo appropinquans. Quid simile Deus fabricans mundum, et decor vulnerans animum, aut magnes attrahens ferrum? Nam etsi apparuit materiae, sed non vulneravit illam, quod decor animam: et si appropinquavit, sed non cohaesi, illi, quod magnes ferro. Puta nunc exempla tua competere. Certe, si apparendo et appropinquando materiae, fecit ex illa Deus mundum, utique ex quo apparuit fecit, et ex quo appropinquavit. Ergo quando non fecerat retro, nec apparuerat illi, nec appropinquaverat. Et cui credibile est, Deum non apparuisse materiae? vel qua consubstantiali suae per aeternitatem? ab ea longe fuisse quem credimus ubique apparere? cui etiam inanimalia et incorporalia laudes canunt apud Danielem (Dan. III). Quantus hic locus in quo Deus a materia tantum distabat, ut neque appareret neque appropinquaret ante mundi molitionem? Credo, peregrinatus est ad illam de longinquo, cum primum ei voluit apparere et appropinquare.

does a beauty merely by appearing, and the lodestone merely by approaching. What likeness is there between God fashioning the world and beauty wounding the mind, or a magnet drawing iron? For even if He appeared to matter, yet He did not wound it, as beauty does the soul; and if He approached it, yet He did not cleave to it, as the magnet does to iron. Suppose now that your examples apply. Certainly, if it was by appearing and approaching to matter that God made the world out of it, then surely He made it from the time when He appeared, and from the time when He approached. Therefore when He had not yet made it, in time past, He had neither appeared to it nor approached it. And to whom is it credible that God had not appeared to matter? or to one, as it were, consubstantial with Him through eternity? that He Whom we believe to appear everywhere had been far from it? He to Whom even inanimate and incorporeal things sing praises in Daniel (Dan. 3)? How great was this place in which God stood so far distant from matter that He neither appeared to it nor approached it before the construction of the world? I suppose He journeyed to it from afar, as soon as He first wished to appear and to approach to it.

CAPUT XLV.

Chapter XLV.

At enim prophetae et apostoli non ita tradunt mundum a Deo factum, apparente solummodo et appropinquante materiae, qui nec materiam ullam nominaverunt, sed primo Sophiam conditam initium viarum in opera ipsius (Prov. VIII, 22): dehinc et sermonem prolatum, per quem omnia facta sunt, et sine quo factum est nihil (Joan. I, 3). Denique sermone ejus coeli confirmita sunt, et spiritu ipsius universae virtutes eorum (Psal. XXXIII, 6). Hic

But indeed the prophets and apostles do not so hand down that the world was made by God, with Him merely appearing and approaching to matter, they who did not even name any matter; but [they relate] that first Wisdom was founded, the beginning of ways for His works (Prov. 8:22); then also that the Word was brought forth, through Whom all things were made, and without Whom nothing was made (John 1:3). Lastly, by His Word the heavens were made firm, and by His Spirit all their powers (Ps. 32:6). This

Editors' notes and page, col. 261

Variae lectiones

(printed under page 135)

(48) ‹anchor: credimus ubique apparere› · call in col 261

Undique Lat.

"Undique" (from every side): the Latin edition.

(printed under page 135)

(49) ‹anchor: Sophiam conditam initium› · call in col 261

Initia Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

"Initia" (beginnings, plural): Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

(printed under page 135)

(50) ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible in the page-foot images

Atque molitus Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

"Atque molitus" (and having laboured at): Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

(printed under page 135)

(51) ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible in the page-foot images

Rhenan. et post eum, ut solent. Seml. Oberth. inversione legunt : cœlum et palmo terram.

Rhenanus and, after him, as they usually do, Semler and Oberthür read with the order inverted: "cœlum et palmo terram" (the heaven, and the earth with his palm).

(printed under page 135)

(52) ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible in the page-foot images

Non ita Rhen. Seml.

"Non ita" (not so): Rhenanus, Semler.

(printed under page 135)

(53) ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible in the page-foot images

Cœlos Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

"Cœlos" (the heavens): Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

(printed under page 135)

(54) ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible in the page-foot images

Universa constituit. Rhen. Seml.

"Universa constituit" (he established all things): Rhenanus, Semler.

(printed under page 135)

(91) ‹anchor: facit qui decor solummodo› · call in col 261

Sicut facit qui decor. Id est, aliquis decor. Sed hoc ab Rhenano est. Nam antea legebatur. « Facit quid decor solummodo apparens. » Quod rectum est. Decor solummodo apparens facit aliquid, hoc est vulnerat animum, ut ipse mox dicet Lucretius, IV : Sed tamen esto jam quantovis oris honore, / Cui Veneris membris vis omnibus exhortatur, etc. RIG.

"As does some beauty": that is, some beauty or other. But this is from Rhenanus, for formerly the reading was "Beauty merely appearing does something." Which is right: beauty merely appearing does something, that is, it wounds the mind, as Lucretius himself will presently say, Book IV: "But grant that she be of whatever honour of face you will, / from all whose limbs the power of Venus breathes forth," etc. Rigault.

(printed under page 135)

(92) ‹anchor: inanimalia et incorporalia laudes› · call in col 261

Inanimalia et incorporalia. Alludit ad hymnum trium puerorum Dan. III juxta editionem Theodotionis ; nam in Hebræo non haberi recte annotavit B. Hieronymus. Eumdem etiam citat exomologesis titulo B. Cyprianus libris de Lapsis et de Oratione Dominica. Qui loci annotandi pro dicti hymni canonica auctoritate, quam etiam Ecclesia illi tribuit, in qua non modo nunc in sabbatis quatuor temporum, sed ab initio nascentis Ecclesiæ, semper in omni solemnitate in sacris fidelium decantatum fuisse trium puerorum hymnum, testantur Augustinus serm. 47, de Tempore (qui eumdem etiam nominatim citat ep. 186, de Jejunio Sabbati), et Ruffinus, lib. II, adv. Hieronymum. Cui idem Hieronymus respondet, quidquid de eo scripserat sua in Danielem præfatione, ex sententia Hebræorum dixisse. Quid ? quod idem Hieronymus epist. ad Demetriadem de Virginitate servanda, citet ex ipsius hymni præmissis, quæ similiter in Hebræo non habentur, illud quod succensus sit ignis 49 cubitorum, Quomodo etiam B. Augustinus, illud ex ejusdem procemio. Quoniam justus es in omnibus quæ fecisti nobis, epist. 122. PAM.

"Things without soul and without body": he alludes to the hymn of the three youths, Daniel 3, according to Theodotion's edition; for St Jerome rightly noted that it is not found in the Hebrew. St Cyprian also cites it, under the title of an exomologesis, in his books On the Lapsed and On the Lord's Prayer. These passages are to be noted for the canonical authority of that hymn, which the Church also gave it; in the Church, not only now on the Saturdays of the Ember Days but from the beginning of the infant Church, the hymn of the three youths has always been sung at every solemnity in the rites of the faithful, as Augustine witnesses in sermon 47 de Tempore (he also cites it by name in letter 186, On the Saturday Fast), and Rufinus, Book II against Jerome. Jerome replied to him that whatever he had written of it in his preface to Daniel he had said according to the opinion of the Hebrews. What of this, that the same Jerome, in his letter to Demetrias on preserving virginity, cites from the verses before the hymn itself, which likewise are not in the Hebrew, the fact that the fire was kindled to forty-nine cubits; as St Augustine also cites from its preamble, "For Thou art just in all that Thou hast done to us," letter 122. Pamelius.

(printed under page 135)

(93) ‹anchor: not visible› · call not visible in the page-foot images

Valentia facientis terram, etc. Jeremiæ LI, voces Græcæ sunt τῇ ἰσχύι, τῇ σοφίᾳ, τῇ συνέσει. Pro quibus transtulit et hic et paulo post auctor, valentiam, id est, fortitudinem. intelligentiam, sensum. PAM.

"By the strength of him who makes the earth," etc. In Jeremiah 51 the Greek words are "by the strength, by the wisdom, by the understanding." For these the author, both here and a little later, has rendered valentiam, that is, fortitude, then intelligentiam and sensum. Pamelius.

(printed under page 135)

Page

running head: 261 LIBER ADV. HERMOGE (cut off at the image edge; presumably HERMOGENEM)
marginal letters: A facit qui decor solummodo apparens; B corporalia laudes canunt apud Danielem; C hinc et sermonem prolatum; D Lucretius, IV (in the Commentarius at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: 237 after in

PL 2:262

est Dei dextera et manus ambae per quas operatus est ea quae molitus est (Isa. XLVIII, 13). Opera enim manuum tuarum, inquit, coeli (Psal. CII, 26); per quas et mensus est terram et palmo coelum (Isa. XL, 12). Noli ita Deo adulari, ut velis illum solo visu et solo accessu tot ac tantas substantias protulisse et non propriis viribus instituisse. Sic enim et Jeremias commendat: Deus faciens terram in valentia sua, parans orbem intelligentia sua, et suo sensu extendit coelum (Jerem. LI 15; Psal LXIV, 7). Hae sunt vires ejus, quibus enixus, totum hoc condidit. Major est gloria ejus, si laboravit. Denique septima die requievit ab operibus (Gen. II, 2). Utrumque suo more. Aut si apparens solummodo et adpropinquans fecit hunc mundum, nunquid cum facere desiit, rursus apparere et appropinquare cessavit? Atquin magis apparere coepit, et ubique conveniri Deus, ex quo factus est mundus. Vides ergo quemadmodum operatione Dei universa consistunt, valentia facientis terram, intelligentia parantis orbem, et sensu extendentis coelum: non apparentis sol⟨um⟩modo, nec appropinquantis, sed adhibentis tantos animi sui nisus, sophiam, valentiam, sensum, sermonem, spiritum, virtutemquae illi non erant necessaria, si apparendo tantummodo et appropinquando profectus fuisset. Haec autem sunt invisibilia ejus, quae secundum apostolum ab institutione mundi de factis ejus conspiciuntur (Rom. II, 20), non materiae nescio quae, sed sensualia ipsius. Quis enim cognovit sensum Domini? De quo exclamat: O profondum divitiarum et sophiae, ut ininventibilia judicia ejus, et ininvestigabiles viae ejus! (Rom. XI, 33). Quid haec

is the right hand of God and both His hands, through which He wrought the things that He constructed (Isa. 48:13). For the heavens, it says, are the works of Thy hands (Ps. 102:26); through which also He measured the earth, and the heaven with His palm (Isa. 40:12). Do not so flatter God as to want Him to have brought forth so many and such great substances by sight alone and by approach alone, and not to have established them by His own powers. For thus Jeremiah too commends Him: God making the earth in His strength, preparing the world by His intelligence, and by His understanding He stretched out the heaven (Jer. 51:15; Ps. 64:7). These are His powers, by which, exerting Himself, He founded this whole. His glory is the greater if He laboured. Finally, on the seventh day He rested from His works (Gen. 2:2). Both in His own manner. Or if He made this world merely by appearing and drawing near, did He, when He ceased to make, also cease in turn to appear and to draw near? On the contrary, God began all the more to appear and to be met everywhere from the time that the world was made. You see, therefore, how all things consist by the operation of God, by the strength of Him Who makes the earth, by the intelligence of Him Who prepares the world, and by the understanding of Him Who stretches out the heaven: not of One merely appearing, nor drawing near, but applying such great exertions of His mind, wisdom, strength, understanding, word, spirit, power, which would not have been necessary to Him if He had accomplished it merely by appearing and drawing near. Now these are His invisible things, which according to the apostle are seen from the foundation of the world through the things He has made (Rom. 2:20), not some matter or other, but His own intellectual faculties. For who has known the mind of the Lord? Concerning which he exclaims: O depth of the riches and of wisdom, how unfindable are His judgements, and unsearchable His ways! (Rom. 11:33). What do these

Editors' notes and page, col. 262

Footnotes

(Q3: Variae lectiones 50–54 and Commentarius (93), printed under page 135, are set in n261.md with "call not visible"; their calls stand in col 262: ⁵⁰ at "ea quae ⁵⁰ molitus est"; ⁵¹ at "palmo coelum" (the numeral is printed blurred, looking like 59); ⁵² at "Noli ita ⁵² Deo"; ⁵³ at "extendit coelum ⁵³"; ⁵⁴ at "consistunt ⁵⁴"; (93) at "facientis terram (93)".)

(55) ‹anchor: illi non erant› · call in col 262

Erunt Rhen. Seml.

"Erunt" (will be): Rhenanus, Semler.

(printed under page 135)

(56) ‹anchor: necessaria, si› · call in col 262

Ut apparendo Oberth cum iisd.

"Ut apparendo" (so that by appearing): Oberthür with the same (Rhenanus, Semler).

(printed under page 135)

(57) ‹anchor: appropinquando profectus fuisset› · call in col 262

Abesse fuisset vult. Lat.

Latinius would have "fuisset" absent.

(printed under page 135)

(58) ‹anchor: ab institutione mundi› · call in col 262

De non inser. Rhen. nec Seml., nec Oberth.

"De" is not inserted by Rhenanus, nor by Semler, nor by Oberthür.

(printed under page 135)

(59) ‹anchor: De quo exclamat› · call in col 262

Et clamat : profundum ; iidem pariter leg.

"Et clamat: profundum" (and he cries out: "depth"): the same likewise read.

Commentarius

(printed under page 135)

(94) ‹anchor: invisibilia ejus› · call in col 262

Invisibilia ejus. etc. Pro, invisibilia Dei a mundi creatione creaturis intellecta videntur. Rom. 1. LE PR.

"His invisible things," etc. For "the invisible things of God are seen from the creation of the world, being understood by the things that are made," Romans 1. Le Prieur.

(printed under page 135)

(95) ‹anchor: et ininvestigabiles› · call in col 262

Ininventibilia judicia ejus, et ininvestigabiles, etc. Quando pertinaciter consentiunt exemplaria quæ vidimus omnia, arbitror ininventibilia dictum perinde ac si dicas incompertibilia, nempe quæ inveniri nequeant, et cognosci quamlibet annitamur, (continued in n264, Editors' prose, page 136, where the note ends LE PR.)

"His unfindable judgements and untraceable [ways]," etc. Since all the copies we have seen agree obstinately, I think ininventibilia is said just as if you said incompertibilia, that is, things that cannot be found out or known however hard we strive, (continued in n264, page 136)

(printed under page 135)

Page

running head: ADV. HERMOGENEM. 262
marginal letters: A ‹est Dei dextera et manus›; B ‹cere desiit, rursus›; C ‹sed sensualia ipsius›; D ‹ipsius hymni praemissis› (in the Commentarius at the page foot)
old-edition numerals: 288 after ‹rursus›
misprints kept as printed: Rom. II, 20 (for I, 20); profondum (for profundum); virtutem-quae (for virtutemque, quae?) set as virtutemquae

PL 2:263

magis sapiunt, quam ut ex nihilo omnia facta sint? quae nec invenire nec investigari nisi a solo Deo possent; alioqui investigabilia, si ex materia sunt investigata et inventa. Igitur in quantum constitit materiam nullam fuisse ex hoc etiam quod nec talem competat fuisse qualis inducitur, in tantum

savour of more than that all things were made out of nothing? things which could be neither found nor searched out except by God alone; otherwise [they would be] investigable, if they have been searched out and found out of matter. Therefore, inasmuch as it has been established that there was no matter, from this also, that it is not fitting that it should have been such as it is introduced, in so much

Editors' notes and page, col. 263

Page

running head: 263 TERTULLIANI OPERUM PARS I[...] (cut off at right edge)
marginal letters: A magis sapiunt
old-edition numerals: (none)

PL 2:264

probatur omnia a Deo ex nihilo facta, nisi quod Hermogenes eumdem statum describendo materiae, quo est ipse, inconditum, confusum, turbulentum ancipitis et praecipitis et fervidi motus, documentum artis suae dum ostendit, ipse se pinxit.

is it proved that all things were made by God out of nothing, except that Hermogenes, in describing the condition of matter as the same as that in which he himself is, unformed, confused, turbulent, of a wavering, headlong and seething motion, has painted himself while he displays a specimen of his own art.

Editors' notes and page, col. 264

Variae lectiones

(printed under page 136)

(60) ‹anchor: probatur omnia a Deo› · call in col 264

Probaretur iidem contra omnes.

"Probaretur" (would be proved): the same [editors], against all [the rest].

(printed under page 136; Q3: text taken from the full-width Variae lectiones line set below, whose left half, under col 263, Q3's images do not show)

(61) ‹anchor: quo est ipse› · call in col 264

Al. quod est ipse.

Another reading: "quod est ipse" (which he himself is).

(printed under page 136)

(62) ‹anchor: documentum artis suae› · call in col 264

Documentis Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

"Documentis" (by specimens, plural): Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

(printed under page 136)

Editors' prose

SYNOPSIS HISTORICA.

HISTORICAL SYNOPSIS.

Murcio Synope in Ponto natus est circa annum 148, imperante Antonino. Hic initio vitae castitatem prae se ferens monachorum instituta professus est, parente natus catholicae communionis episcopo. Postea, cum virginem adamasset ea abusus est. Ob hunc igitur incestum Ecclesia ab ipso parente pulsus est, viro cum primis religioso, ac veritatis amore flagrantissimo, et in episcopalis muneris administratione praestantissimo. Cui cum Marcio diu, multumque supplicasset, ac poenitentiam postulasset, a patre precibus nullis obtinuit. Romam itaque se contulit, et seniores adiens, qui ab apostolorum discipulis edocti, adhuc supererant ut in, communionem admitteretur, frustra petiit. Quamobrem exstimulatus invidia, ac ira percitus, illis dixit : Ecclesiam vestram ego dissociabo, in eamque schisma sempiternum immittam; et discedens, ad impostoris Cerdonis haeresim confugere in animum induxit (S. Epiphanus, haeres, 42). Cerdonis haec erant dogmata: Deum legis conditorem alium esse a Patre Domini nostri Jesu Christi; hunc bonum fuisse illum malum; Jesum Christum veram nostraeque consubstantialem carnem non assumpsisse, nec de virgine Maria natum fuisse. Dupin.

Marcion was born at Sinope in Pontus about the year 148, in the reign of Antoninus. At the beginning, making a show of chastity of life, he professed the institutes of the monks, being the son of a father who was a bishop of the catholic communion. Afterwards, having fallen in love with a virgin, he abused her. For this incest, therefore, he was driven from the Church by his own father, a man religious above most, burning most ardently with the love of truth, and most outstanding in the discharge of the episcopal office. Though Marcion besought him long and much and asked for penance, he obtained nothing from his father by any prayers. He therefore betook himself to Rome and, approaching the elders who, taught by the disciples of the apostles, still survived, sought in vain to be admitted to communion. Wherefore, goaded by envy and stirred by anger, he said to them: 'I will divide your Church, and cast into it an everlasting schism'; and, departing, he resolved to take refuge in the heresy of the impostor Cerdo (St Epiphanius, Heresies, 42). These were the dogmas of Cerdo: that the God who founded the law is other than the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; that the latter was good, the former evil; that Jesus Christ did not take true flesh, consubstantial with ours, nor was born of the Virgin Mary. Dupin.

Opus adversus Marcionem conscripsit Tertullianus, postquam in Montanistarum errorem lapsus est, ut apparet ex illis verbis (cap. 29, lib. I) : Nubendi jam modus ponitur, Paracleto auctore, unum in fide matrimonium praescribitur, et dum novas prophetias commemorat, et de quibusdam revelationibus loquens scribit (lib IV, cap. 22) : De quo inter nos, et Psychicos quaestio est; quae profecto distinctio, communionis designat diversitatem. Haec tamen minime impediunt quin opus istud Tertulliani optimum dici queat, et veluti thesaurus antiquioris theologiae. Primum opusculum hoc eodem de argumento exaraverat, sed currenti, ut aiunt, calamo, quod postea (lib. IV, cap. I) pleniore positione resciderat, sed et istud fraude fratris apostatae sibi supreptum dicit; quam jacturam ut repararet, hocce tertium elucubravit anno XV Severi imperatoris, a Christi Natali 207. Lumper.

Tertullian wrote the work Against Marcion after he had fallen into the error of the Montanists, as appears from these words (ch. 29, book I): 'Now a measure is set to marrying, the Paraclete being its author; one marriage in the faith is prescribed'; and while he mentions 'new prophecies', and, speaking of certain revelations, writes (book IV, ch. 22): 'Concerning which there is a question between us and the Psychics'; which distinction certainly marks a difference of communion. These things, however, by no means prevent this work of Tertullian from being called excellent, and as it were a treasury of the more ancient theology. He had first written a little work on this same subject, but with a running pen, as they say, which he afterwards (book IV, ch. I) 'had rescinded with a fuller exposition'; but he says that this too was stolen from him 'by the fraud of an apostate brother'; to repair which loss he worked out this third one in the fifteenth year of the Emperor Severus, in the year 207 from the Nativity of Christ. Lumper.

TOTIUS OPERIS CONSPECTUS.

CONSPECTUS OF THE WHOLE WORK.

Primo itaque loco Dei unitatem et singularitatem ostendit, cum impossibile evincat duo dari suprema entia: Qui enim duo potuit admittere, idem et plura; post duo enim multitudo, unione jam excussa, numerus autem divinitatis summa ratione constare debet. Porro Marcion, ut bina sua adstrueret principia, dicebat Creatorem esse culpandum, quippe qui malorum auctor dicendus foret, inquiente Scriptura (Isa. XLV, 7) : Ego formans pacem, et creans malum. At Tertullianus ostendit impium esse, blasphemum et temerarium de Deo dicere (cap. 3, n. 4) : Sic non debuit Deus, et sic magis debuit. Deinde Creatoris bonitatem patefacit in omnibus ejus operibus elucescentem, ac praesertim in primi hominis efformatione ac creatione. Deinde divinae justitiae in malorum punitione necesssitatem ostendit, ad malos coercendos et ad

In the first place, then, he shows the unity and singularity of God, since he proves it impossible that two supreme beings should be granted: 'For he who could admit two could likewise admit more; for after two comes multitude, unity being now shaken off; but the number of the Godhead ought to stand on the highest reason.' Further, Marcion, in order to establish his two principles, said that the Creator was to be blamed, since He would have to be called the author of evils, as Scripture says (Isa. 45:7): 'I form peace, and create evil.' But Tertullian shows that it is impious, blasphemous and rash to say of God (ch. 3, n. 4): 'God ought not to have done thus, and ought rather to have done thus.' Next he makes plain the goodness of the Creator shining forth in all His works, and above all in the forming and creation of the first man. Next he shows the necessity of divine justice in the punishment of evils, for restraining the wicked and for

Variae lectiones.

Variant readings.

60 Probaretur iidem contra omnes. 61 Al. quod est ipse. 62 Documentis Rhen. Seml. Oberth.

60 "Probaretur" [would be proved]: the same [editors], against all [the rest]. 61 Others read "quod est ipse". 62 "Documentis": Rhenanus, Semler, Oberthür.

Commentarius.

Commentary.

[(95), continued] quemadmodum et investigabile hic significat, quod investigari non potest. Meminisse autem debemus Tertullianum in reddendis Graecis duriusculum esse. Id quod in superioribus libris indicavimus. Erat autem haec vox vulgo fortassis usitatior. Nos vim Graeci vocabuli, quod est ἀνεξερεύνητα attendentes, inventibilia aliquando legendum putavimus. RHEN. — Ininventibilia judicia ejus, etc. In Graeco est ἀνεξερεύνητα, hoc est impervia et incomprehensibilia, ut vulgus legit. Porro parum interest si legas investigabiles aut ininvestigabiles, utrumque enim reddi potest ex Graeco ἀνεξιχνίαστοι. LE PR.

[(95), continued] just as "investigabile" here too signifies what cannot be investigated. We ought, moreover, to remember that Tertullian is somewhat harsh in rendering Greek words, as we have pointed out in the preceding books. This word, however, was perhaps more commonly used in ordinary speech. Attending to the force of the Greek word, which is ἀνεξερεύνητα, we thought that "inventibilia" should at one point be read. RHEN. — "His judgements are unfindable [ininventibilia]", etc. In the Greek it is ἀνεξερεύνητα, that is, impassable and incomprehensible, as the common text reads. Further, it makes little difference whether you read "investigabiles" or "ininvestigabiles", for either can be rendered from the Greek ἀνεξιχνίαστοι. LE PR.