Partristics

Fr.João Eléuterio has brought us to go back to the Age of the Fathers. I began the first class by searching some information trough wikipedia site and Fr. also gave us the address of some interesting sites about the Patrology as following;

http://www.supakoo.com/rick/

http://moses.creighton.edu/NAPS/napslinks/index.htm

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/

http://www.ntcanon.org/index.shtml

http://www.ntgateway.com/tools-and-resources/e-lists/

http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/

http://www.mikeaquilina.com/fathers/

At the end of the class we have a take home written examinaition which is about the work of some of the fathers. I choose "De carne Christi" (On the flesh of Christ) by Tertullian. He is such a great man who has done so many things for the Church ubt by the end of his life he joins the Montanism which is another sect of heretic.This module lead me to come to learn about how to read the works of the fathers and how to organize the information from the text and finally how to connect the information with some other sources.I like the way Fr.Eléuterio teaches us, He is like an easy going man no so serious and he share with us to try to find the sense of humour with the things we are doing. Therefore we will do everything with joy.


De carne Christi (On the flesh of Christ): Tertullian
Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, or in English “Tertullian” was born in around 160 AD, at Carthage in North Africa. He is the first one who used a beautiful Latin in his writing. He has been trained in literature and rhetoric and practices as a Lawyer. He also learned a traditional stylistic Latin that we can find in his works. Moreover his works present numerous examples of familiarity with the techniques of rhetoric.
During that time Greek was used as a principle language of the Church for a century. But Tertullian made a possibility of Latin Language to become an official language of the Catholic Church in which theology can be communicated. He is awesome credited with having much of the use of the words which later on will be use in theological tradition. His works remain an outstanding source of knowledge of Christian Latin.
Apparently, the terms that he uses are borrowed and adapted from existing Latin versions of the Bible which is already begun to appear in his days. But nonetheless he is a very important theologian. He contributes a great deal to what will become a developing theological tradition of the Latin west. At the same time he is rather enigmatic and perplexing figure because the rigorist in his life. He embraces Montanism, a heresy in North Africa where he lives. The Montanism emphasizes on purity of the people of God especially the clergies. Tertullian, on the later part of his life, goes over to Montanism tradition with his eschatological aspect. He claims of having a prophetic aspect and the gift of prophecy.
We have to trace back to around the 5th - 6th centuries that they began to compile the extant works of Tertullian. The history of the texts brought us back to his writings that have survived to us through six manuscripts: (Corpus Trecense, Corpus Masburense, Corpus Agobardinum, Corpus Cluniacense and Codex Ottobonianus latinus and The most astonishing discovery has been made recently in the Netherlands[1]), along with additional fragmentary document evidence. Scholars have divided Tertullian’s writings into three categories: apologetic treatises, polemical-dogmatic works, and moral and ascetical writings.
In the 19th-20th century, we have another compilation called “Corpus Christianorum” as it is a great work undertaking of the Belgian publisher Brepols devoted to patristic and Medieval Latin texts. The principal series are the Series Graeca, Series Latina, and the Continuatio Mediaevalis. There is also a smaller section devoted to Apocryphal works. The principal series are seen in some ways as successors to Fr.Jacques Paul Migne's Patrology
The great series that made by Fr.Migne were Patrologiae cursus completus, Latin series (Patrologia Latina; MPL) in 221 vols. (1844-5); Greek series (Patrologia Graeca; MPG), first published in Latin (85 vols., 1856-7); with Greek text and Latin translation (165 vols., 1857-8). They have been criticized by many scholars during that time of the publication as a cause of cheaply printed and widely distributed texts. Gradually they have replaced the older versions during a century and a half with more critically edited modern editions.
I found “The flesh of Christ” as in the English version of “De carne Christi” Translated by Peter Holmes. It’s taken from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 3. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.)[2]
In Tertullian’s polemical and dogmatic writings, which De carne Christi is a part of it, there are several works that he wrote against the heretics. In De carne Christi (On the flesh of Christ), Tertullian emphasizes on the reality of the Body of Christ and His virgin-birth. This work and together with another work called “De resurrectione carnis (On the resurrection of the flesh)”, have shown specific arguments against the Gnostic Docetism of Marcion, Apelles and Valentinus, for they denied the reality of the body of Christ. Tertullian proves that the body of Christ was a real human body.
There are twenty five chapters in this polemic work which we can basically separate it into two parts. The first part contains of chapter 1 – 16 and also works as a refutation of the doctrines against Macion, Apelles and Valentinus. The second part, chapter 17-25, serves as the proofs for the Christian belief.
Here I would like to give some commentaries on it as best as I can.
At the beginning of the first Chapter we found the name “Marcion” as I have said above that this work is mainly against him. Marcion, had lived around 85-160, was an Early Christian theologian who was excommunicated by the Christian church at Rome as a heretic. His teachings were influential during the 2nd century and a few centuries after, rivaling that of the Church of Rome. It is very interesting that, while the other Gnostics founded the schools, Marcion, after separating from the Church, founded his own churches. Justin reports that his church had spread ‘over the whole of mankind’. His churches remain until the very first of middle Ages.
Marcion was called by St.Polycarp of Smyrna (ca.69-155) as “the first born of Satan.” He rejects the Old Testament while adopts only the New Testament rely on the letters of St.Paul. He wrote his own gospel called the Gospel of Marcion which contains of eleven books, his own gospel and ten epistles of St.Paul. According to him, St.Paul was the only apostle who had rightly understood the new message of salvation as delivered by Christ.
Here Tertullian disputes Marcion with his lawyer style by giving his arguments that if Marcion denies the flesh of Christ, he also denies Christ’s Nativity, because there is no nativity without flesh, and no flesh without nativity. For, Marcion accepts only the idea of the incarnation of Christ, but in a wrong sense, as Jesus Christ was the Heavenly Father made fresh in order to pay the debt of sin for humanity. Marcion called the nativity of Christ as a phantom and its story is regarded as a putative.
Irenaeus, in Adv. Haer. 1,27,1, tells us as “Marcion taught that the God proclaimed by the Law and the Prophets is not the Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the one being revealed, the other unknown; the one again being just, the other good”. Marcion’s Christology shows us his Gnostic tendency. Christ is not the Messiah who was prophesied in the Old Testament. He was not born of the Virgin Mary, because he had neither birth nor growth, nor even semblance of them. By the shedding of his blood he redeemed all souls.[3]
In additional, we also have the name “Apelles” as it is said that he was ‘the first disciple of Marcion’. He was expelled from the Marcionite society. He rejected his teacher’s declaring dualism and endeavored to get back to a single first principle. In De praescriptione haereticorum 30, Tertullian tells us that this was because he had become intimate with a woman named Philumena who claimed to be possessed by an angel, who gave her revelations which Apelles read out in public.
Apelles eliminated Marcion’s Docetism. Jesus Christ was no phantom; he had a real body although he did not receive it from the Virgin Mary but borrowed it from the four elements of the stars. When he ascended he restored his body to the elements. On the other hand, Apelles went much farther than Marcion in his rejection of the Old Testament. He called it as ‘a lying book’ and entirely unreliable. He also composed a book entitled ‘The Syllogisms’. St.Ambrose, in his De paradiso, says something about this book, but unfortunately nothing about it left to us. [4]
Another name is founded in this chapter is “Valentinus” or sometimes spelled “Valentus”. He was the best known and for a time most successful early Christian Gnostic theologian. According to Tertullian, in Adversus Valentinianos 4, Valentinus was a candidate for bishop but started his own group when another was chosen. He taught that there were three kinds of people, the spiritual, psychical, and material; and that only those of a spiritual nature received the gnosis (knowledge) that allowed them to return to the divine Pleroma, while those of a psychic nature (ordinary Christians) would attain a lesser form of salvation, and that those of a material nature were doomed to perish.
The last sentence of Chapter one points us to another sect of belief as we called “Docetism”. It is derived from the Greek word “δοκέω” meaning “to seem”. They have the belief that Jesus' physical body was an illusion, as was his crucifixion; that is, Jesus only seemed to have a physical body and to physically die, but in reality he was incorporeal, a pure spirit, and therefore could not physically die.
This comes up with the challenging idea that we can not believe in the resurrection of the flesh unless we believe that Christ has flesh. Then, from chapter two, Tertullian will present his argumentative idea which I would like to express into a frame that consists of three major questions as; 1. Dose the bodily nature of Christ exist? 2. Where does it come from? 3. What sort is it?
Let us then come to the first question. Dose the bodily nature of Christ exist?
In order to find out the answer for this question I have to go through between chapters 2-5. In chapter two, Tertullian brings us to the biblical foundation of the Nativity of Christ as we can find in the narration of St.Luke’s Gospel. Tertullian blames Marcion for his harden heart to believe the thing that what the Christians have believed and once Marcion used to believe, and then he rejects. Marcion falsifies the scriptures and his argument is not based on the original facts.
Here I notice the use of the word “hand down” which in Latin as “tradere”. Tertullian confirms the reliability of the force of the tradition that Christian faith is communicated by the apostles. This apostolic authority has been handed down from the disciples of Jesus to all believers. Therefore, Tertullian confirms, “when rejecting that which had been handed down, you (Marcion and his disciples) rejected that which was true”.
In chapter 5, there is one quotation which has been understood in the popular phrase attributed to Tertullian called “Credo quia absurdum est” I found the Latin text as;
Crucifixus est dei filius; non pudet, quia pudendum est.
Et mortuus est dei filius: prorsus credibile est, quia ineptum est.
Et sepultus resurrexit: certum est,quia impossibile.[5]
This should be understood as a paradox. Tertullian admits that it is shameful in the eyes of the world, but he justifies this shame. The incarnation is an act of love which voluntarily ignores worldly wisdom; the hate of Marcion for the flesh implies hate of himself and humanity; contrariwise, the love of Christ for man implies acceptance of his flesh without which man cannot exist. Christ could have taken the form of a man to preach the true wisdom and “chose the foolish things of the world to shame the things that are wise” (Phil.2:8)
Without true incarnation, there can be no true redemption. Logically, the heretic should have suppressed both the passion and resurrection in his gospel. God must have flesh, in order to have a real death and real resurrection.
As For the second question, where does it come from? It takes me to examine between chapters 6-9. I got the answer of Tertullian to Apelles. He confirms that Jesus Christ has a human flesh and also heavenly Spirit. For one who was to be truly a man, even unto death, it was necessary that He should be clothed with that flesh to which death belongs. And the flesh to which death belongs is preceded by birth. It is not a new kind of flesh miraculously obtained from the stars as Apelles’ thought. Christ’s body did not reach even to human beauty, to say nothing on heavenly glory. His very sufferings and the very contumely He endured bespeak it all.
The answer of the last question, what sort is it? It covers from chapters 10-23. Tertullian begins with the nature of Christ flesh and soul as it is a subsequence of the plan of Salvation for the humanity. Christ has a human nature of birth and yet he is God. This brings us to the necessity of the virgin birth from Mary.
In chapter 16-17, it appears the name ‘Alexander’ as another heretic but we know very little about his life. Chapter 17 refers to Alexander’s syllogisms and because of this false teaching Tertullian repeats the teaching of St.Irenaeus about the antitype between Mary and Eve.

Conclusion.
Tertullian in his De carne Christi, he proves that Christ was really born, that His nativity was both possible and becoming and that He truly lived and died in human flesh, thus refuting Marcion’s Docetic ideas. His nature was not taken from the angels, though He is called the Angel of the Lord, nor from the stars as Apelles maintained, nor from some spiritual substance as Valentinus supposed, since He became exactly like us in all save only in sin, nor, on the other hand, derived from human seed; thus the flesh of the first Adam and that of the second Adam did not have an earthly father.
Tertullian clearly announces the two natures in the one person of Christ. There is no transformation of the divinity into the humanity, any more than a fusion or combination that would have made only one substance out of two, two substances in one person. Later on, the idea of substance will be issued during the period of the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.
I begin my presupposition that this work is more concern with Christology, but as far as I go through it, here comes the Mariology. As it is the eagerness of Tertullian to defend the real humanity of Christ. He stresses the point that Christ’s body is not heavenly but really born of the very substance of Mary, (ex Maria). Surprisingly, that he denies the virginity of Mary both period of “upon to bear” (in partu) and “after to bear” (post partum). He also assumes that she had had normal conjugal relations with Joseph after Jesus’ birth, the brethren of the Lord, being His true brothers[6] according to the flesh. (De carne Christi 7)
Apart from this, I found the contributions of Tertullian who agrees with St.Irenaeus the idea of regarding Mary as the antitype of Eve. This thesis is introduced by St.Justin, although he refused that he was not innovating it. For, Mary is the second Eve who absolutely contrast with the first Eve, by obeying to God’s will and respond meekly to be the one, whom made the birth of a Redeemer possible that brings forth Salvation to humanity.
In De carne Christi, Tertullian gives me such a good example in his explanation which, I think, he also did to others. I feel a little pity that he should not give up the Catholic Faith and adopt the rigorous Montanism. Though he was excommunicated his works still being useful sources for the Church. Pope Benedict XVI also gave a good account of him, during his general audience on May 30, 2007, as “this great moral and intellectual man makes me think deeply”. I do agree with the Pope, when he explained the lost of Tertullian’s faith in Catholic Church, that “we always need forgiveness.” The pope said that to emphasize on the humility to remain with the Church as an essential characteristic of theologians.
Once in my life I have a valuable experience in reading a tremendous work of a great man. It encourages me to go further on my journey as a searcher for the will of God. No matter how hard it is, how shameful it will be, there full of hope to be possible.




[1] Johannes Quasten, Patrology Vol 1. Christian Classics, Notre Dame, IN, USA (pp. 251-254)

[2] This can be searched through http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.vii.i.html and also another English translation through http://www.tertullian.org/articles/evans_carn/evans_carn_04eng.htm which was translated by Ernest Evans.
[3] Johannes Quasten, Patrology Vol 1. Christian Classics, Notre Dame, IN, USA (pp. 260-261)
[4] Johannes Quasten, Patrology Vol 1. Christian Classics, Notre Dame, IN, USA (pp. 268-273)
[5] This can be searched through http://www.tertullian.org/articles/evans_carn/evans_carn_03latin.htm

[6] John Norman Davidson Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines. HarperCollins, N.Y., 1978 (p.493)