A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

TERTULLIAN.

TErtullian a 1.1 was a Native of Africa, of the City of Carthage b 1.2. His Father was a Centu∣rion * 1.3 in the Troops which served under the Proconsul of Africa c 1.4 And there is no doubt to be made, but that he was at first a Heathen d 1.5, but it is not known when, nor upon what occasion he was entred into the Church e 1.6. He flourished chiefly under the Reigns of the Emperors Severus, and Antoninus Caracalla f 1.7, from about the year of our Lord 194, till towards the year 216. And it is very probable, that he lived several years after, since S. Jerom relates, that it was reported in his time, that he lived to an extream old Age g 1.8. But we do not exactly know the time of his Death.

The Books that he wrote to his Wife sufficiently shew, that he was a Married Man, but we cannot gather from thence when he was Married. The Learned are divided as to this matter, some pre∣tending that he married his Wife before he was a Christian, and that he left her after he embraced Christianity; others believing, that he was not Married till after he was Baptized. Which has been the occasion that some have found a difficulty in clearing this Point, which at first sight seems to be of no great moment, whether, as it is commonly believed, that Tertullian was ordained a Priest with∣in a little time after his Conversion; if he married his Wife after he was Baptized, and afterwards remained with her, it would seem that it might be concluded from thence, that in his time it was lawful for Priests to Marry. And this is that which has made Pamelius say, that Tertullian. before he was ordained Priest, made a Vow of Continence to his Wife. But because it appears in the Books which he directed to her, that he still lived with her when he wrote them, the Author of the Life of Tertullian and Origen has been obliged to say, that he might maintain Pamelius's Opinion, that these Books were written by Tertullian immediately after his Conversion: Though it is more probable, that Tertullian was not Married till after he was Baptized h 1.9, and that he did not write these Books to his Wife till he was old i 1.10, a little before he fell into the Errors of the Montanists.

There is no Passage in his Writings from whence it can be concluded, that he was a Priest of the Catholick Church k 1.11; but S. Jerom affirms it so positively l 1.12, that there is no reason to question it. It is commonly believed, that he was a Priest of the Church of Rome m 1.13: But being of Carthage, and ha∣ving almost always remained there, he ought rather to be called a Priest of the Church of Carthage, than of Rome. He was not so happy as to preserve this Dignity to the end of his days, for after ha∣ving continued in the Church for about 40 or 45 years, he separated from it in the beginning of the Third Century n 1.14, to follow the Sect of Montanus and his Disciples.

As to the Reasons of his Separation, some have said, that it was Jealousie that carried him to this Excess, because Victor was Preferred before him to the See of Rome; Others say, that he was angry because he could not get the Bishopr••ck of Carthage, which he put in for, and that this made him take up such a Resolution; And lastly, others have assigned different Reasons o 1.15, which are yet less probable; But this is rather to divine, than to give the Reasons of Tertullian's Change: Which are no where grounded upon the Testimony of any ancient Writer. That which has the most likelihood, is what is related by S. Jerom, that the Envy which the Roman Clergy bore him, and the Outragious manner wherewith they treated him, exasperated him against the Church, and induced him to sepa∣rate from it. And besides, the extraordinary Austerity which appeared in the Sect of the Montanists, suited very well with his violent and severe Temper, which caused him to carry every thing to Ex∣tremities. And it was for this reason that he was so enraged against the Catholicks, and that he treated the Church with such Fury, after his Separation from it. It does not appear by his Books, that he ever afterwards returned from his Error, and none of the Ancients have affirmed it; but on the contrary, they have all spoken of him, as of a dead Man out of the Communion of the Church. It would therefore be a thing altogether against common Sense to imagine, as some have done, that he at last returned into the Bosom of the Church.

And this is an exact Abridgment of Tertullian's Life; let us now proceed to his Writings, and be∣gin by examining the Order, according to which they were Composed, that so we may afterwards make a more exact Judgment of them. And by considering them in this manner with relation to the order of Time, they may be divided into two Classes: The first, comprising those which he composed whilst he was still a Catholick; And the second, those which he wrote after he was a Montanist. They are easily distinguished, because he never fails in his later Books, of speaking of the Holy-Ghost of M••ntanus, of the Prophecies of the Montanists, and of their Extraordinary Fasts, of declaiming against Second Marriages, and against the Absolution which is granted by the Catho∣lioks to those who fall into Sin after Baptism; or lastly, of Railing against the Catholicks whom he calls Psychici, that is to say, Carnal and Sensual. But we must consider them more particularly, and examine in what Years the several Books were written.

It is evident, that Tertullian wrote his Book Of Pennance, whilst he was yet a Catholick; for therein he expresly confutes one of the Principal Errors of the Montanists, by proving, that those who have committed Sins after their Baptism, may obtain Absolution from the Church, provided they do Penance. Erasmus questions, whether this Book be Tertullian's or no, because it is written more politely than his other Books; and the Authority of Erasmus has made Rhenanus reject this Discourse, though since 'tis quoted under Tertullian's Name, by S. Pacianus an Author of the Fourth Century,

there seems no reason to question its being Tertullian's: Besides, the difference of the Style is not very considerable, and it is no wonder that Tertullian, when he was a young Man, and newly Converted, should write a Book, upon which he bestowed so great pains, more politely than usual.

His Book of Baptism was written about the same time: For it is not only free from all the Errors of the Montanists, but even what he says, That Baptism is reserved to the Bishops, and that it is never per∣mitted to Women to Teach or to Baptize, is expresly contrary to their Discipline.

Besides, we have no reason to doubt, but that he composed the Discourse of Prayer whilst he was yet a Catholick: For speaking therein concerning Fasts, he says, That there is no Solemn Fast among the Christians, but that which is before Easter; which is contrary to the Discipline of the Montanists, who observe several Lents. Besides, he cites in this Treatise the Book of the Pastor, which he rejected after he was a Montanist. We cannot exactly tell in what Year these Books were written, nor which of the three were Composed first.

His Apology for the Christian Religion was wrote about the year 200 p 1.16, in the beginning of the Per∣secution under the Emperor Severus. It is commonly believed, that he wrote it at Rome, and Ad∣dress'd it to the Senate: But it is more probable, that it was composed in Africa q 1.17, and indeed he does not address himself to the Senate, but to the Proconsul of Africa, and the Governors of the Provinces.

The Books concerning Patience, and the Exhortation to the Martyrs, may have been written about the same time: But that to Scapula was not composed till some years after, as well as the Two Books to the Nations.

Afterwards, as he began to incline towards the Montanists, he wrote about the year 202, or 203, the Discourses concerning Publick Sights and Spectacles, and of Idolatry r 1.18. This is the last of the two, the other being quoted Chap. 13. He was not yet a thorough-paced Montanist, but he began to em∣brace their Opinions, though he had not yet openly left the Church. He still kept the same Opi∣nions when he composed his Books Of the Ornament, and Dresses of Women s 1.19: And two Books Dedi∣cated to his Wife. His Book of The Testimony of the Soul has no certain Epocha t 1.20; but as we do not find therein any Foot-steps of the Errors of the Montanists, we may believe that it was written by Tertullian before he separated from the Church.

And these are all the Works that can be attributed to Tertullian whilst he remained Orthodox, all the others being certainly written after his returning Montanist. His Books against Marcion are the

first of these last kind of Books v 1.21; The Epocha of them is certain, for in the first Book, chap. 15, he says, That he writ it in the 15th Year of the Emperor Severus, that was the 207th after Christ. In the first of these Books he promises his Book of Praescriptions x 1.22: So that although this be a very ex∣cellent Discourse, and that it contains nothing but what is Catholick. yet it must be confessed that he composed it when he was a Montanist, unless we should say, that he kept it by him for some time un∣published: However it be, it was composed when he wrote his Book concerning the Flesh of Jesus Christ, wherein he refers to the Book of Praescriptions in the second Chapter.

The Book concerning the Soul was written after the Books against Marcion, which are cited in the second Chapter, but before the Book concerning the Resurrection of the Flesh, where he quotes his Book concerning the Soul, and also that concerning the Flesh of Jesus Christ. So that this is the Order of the Books composed by Tertullian after those against Marcion. The Book of Praescriptions, of the Soul, of the Flesh of Jesus Christ, of the Resurrection of the Flesh; these were all composed from the year 207, to the year 210.

His Scorpiacus y 1.23, his Book De Coronâ z 1.24, and that De Pallio aa 1.25, were written about the same time, but we do not know the year. In his Book De Coronâ, he says, That he had composed a Treatise con∣cerning the Confessions, and Sufferings of the Martyrs. Baronius believes, that it is the Scorpiacus which he means: But I believe, it is rather that Book concerning Flight in time of Persecution. For his Scorpiacus was written against Hereticks, whereas that which he intended, when he wrote the Book De Coronâ, ought to have been against the Pastors, who withdrew themselves in time of Persecution.

The Book against the Jews was written towards the end of the Reign of Severus, in the year 209, as appears by what he says of the State of the Roman Empire in the seventh Chapter bb 1.26. We do not certainly know the time when those Books were written against Praxeas, against Hermogenes, and against the Valentinians, but only that they were written by Tertullian when he was a Montanist cc 1.27. Neither can we give any account of the time of his writing the following Treatises in Defence of the Montanists against the Church; His Discourse of Chastity, of Fasts, of Monogamy, his Exhortation to Chastity, of Flight in time of Persecution, and that wherein he proves, That Virgins ought to be veil'd. S. Jerom adds to these, Six Books of Extasie, and a Treatise against Apollonius, which are lost.

I have now nothing to consider, but the small Treatise addressed to Scapula, which we certainly know when it was written, for it was after the Death of Severus under Antoninus Caracalla, about

the year 213 dd 1.28. And the two Books to the Gentiles were composed about the same time ee 1.29. And this is the Chronology of all the Works of Tertullian.

There are some others which are falsly attributed to him: And amongst these we are to reckon the small Catalogue of Heresies, which is at the end of the Book of Praescriptions. For first of all, it is of a different Style. Secondly, it was not to be found in the old Manuscript of Agobardus, which is the most ancient Manuscript of Tertullian's Works, nor in another old Manuscript, which Rhenanus made use of for the first Edition of Tertullian. Thirdly, in those Manuscripts where it is to be found, it is separated from the Praescriptions, and sometimes in stead of being at the end, it is placed in the beginning, and so Trithemius both saw, and quoted it. Fourthly, the Praescriptions have a Conclusion before this Catalogue, wherein Tertullian does not promise to make such an Abridgment of the Here∣sies, but to write against them all separately. Fifthly, 'tis the Work of some Author that lived after S. Epiphanius, from whom he borrows the History of Marcion, and perhaps he may have taken from S. Jerom what he says concerning the Jews.

There goes likewise under Tertullian's name a Letter concerning Jewish Meats, but it is of a quite different Style, and the places of Scripture are there quoted after another manner than they are in Ter∣tullian's Works, which plainly shews, that it is none of his: 'Tis a Letter of a Pastor to his Church, written in the time of Persecution. S. Jerom attributes to Novatian a Letter concerning Jewish Meats, which in all probability is this very Treatise that bears the same Title.

There is likewise attributed to Tertullian, a Book concerning the Trinity, which is none of his: For besides the difference of the Style, that Author mentions the Heresie of Sabellius, which was after Tertullian's time. S. Jerom observes, that Novatian writ a Book of the Trinity, wherein he had made an Abridgment of Tertullian's Book; and he adds, that several Persons attributed Novatian's Book to S. Cyprian. The Book of the Trinity, whereof we speak, might possibly be this Abridg∣ment of Novatian, especially since Ruffinus observes, that Novatian's Book was corrupted by the Mace∣donians, which agrees with this Treatise whereof we speak, in which there are Errors concerning the Divinity of the Holy-Ghost.

There pass also under Tertullian's Name several Poems, which are no more his, than they are Virgil's or Homer's. The Poem called Genesis, seems to be that which Gennadius attributes to Salvian Bishop of Marseilles ff 1.30, that concerning the Judgment of God was, perhaps, composed by Verecun∣dus gg 1.31 an African Bishop, mentioned by Isidorus Hispalensis, in the seventh Chapter of his first Book of Illustrious Men. In the Poem against Marcion hh 1.32, there are some Opinions different from those of Ter∣tullian. There is likewise a Poem to a Senator in Pamelius's Edition, one of Sodom, and one of Jonas and Ninive in the Bibliotheca Patrum, of which we do not know the Authors; the first is ancient, and the other two seem to be written by the same Author. Besides, S. Jerom affirms, that Tertullian writ several other Treatises, which were lost in his time, and amongst others, a Book Of the Habits of Aaron, whereof this Father speaks in his Letter to Fabiola. He quotes likewise a Book Of the Circumcision, another Of those Creatures that are Clean, and of such as are Unclean, a Book concerning Extasie, and another against Apollonius; Tertullian himself cites several other Treatises of his own composing, as in his Book Of the Soul, a Discourse concerning Paradise, and in his Book Of the Testimony of the Soul, chap. 2. a Discourse Of Destiny; and in another place, a Book concerning The Hope of the Faithful, and another against Apelles. He had also composed a former Work against Marcion, which being lost in his own time, he was obliged to write a new one. Lastly, he wrote the Discourses Of Baptism, Of Publick Sights and Spectacles, and that wherein he proves, That Virgins ought to be veil'd, in Greek.

But we have said enough of Tertullian's Works as to what relates to Criticism and Chronology, we will now look upon them with relation to what they contain. And considering them thus, we may

distinguish them into three Classes: The first, comprizing those which were written against the Gen∣tiles. The second, those which were made against Hereticks. And the third, those which relate to Discipline and Manners. The first Book of this first Classis is his Apology against the Gentiles, wherein he shews the Injustice of those Persecutions and Sufferings which they inflicted on the Christians, and the Falshood of those Accusations which were laid to their Charge; and at the same time proves the Excellency of their Religion, and the Folly of that of the Heathens. He begins, by shewing that there is nothing more unjust or opposite to the very intent and design of Laws, than to Condemn without Understanding, and to Punish without considering whether there be any just Ground for such a Condemnation. And yet that this is put in practise every day against the Christians, that they are Hated, Condemned, and Punished, merely upon the account of their being Christians, without eve•• considering or giving themselves the trouble to be informed what it is to be a Christian. That there are indeed some Laws made by the Emperors, which forbid Men to be Christians, but that these Laws are Unjust, subject to Alteration, made by Evil Emperors, and contrary to the Opinions of the Justest and Wisest amongst them. He afterwards confutes the Calumnies which were spread abroad against the Christians, as that they used in their Night-Meetings to cut a Child's Throat, and to devour it, and that after they had put out the Candles, they had filthy and abominable Conversa∣tions amongst themselves. He shews, that there is not only so much as the least Proof of these Crimes alledged against them, but that their Life, their Manners, and the Principles of their Religion, were directly opposite to these Abominations.

We are, says he, beset daily, we are continually betrayed, we are very often surprized and oppressed, even in the very time of our Meetings; But did they ever find this Child dead, or a dying? Was there ever any one that could be a Witness of these Crimes? Has ever any one of those who have betrayed us discovered these things?

Besides, he presses the Heathens further, by shewing that these Crimes were frequently committed amongst themselves, that they have slain Children in Africa in Honour of Saturn, and that they have sacrificed Men in other places, that their Gods have been guilty of a thousand shameful and abominable Pra∣ctises; whereas the Christians are so far from killing a Child, and drinking its Blood, that they do not so much as eat the Flesh of those Beasts that have been strangled, and that they are such inveterate Enemies to all kind of Incests, that there are several amongst them who preserve their Virginity all their Lives. After having thus confuted those Calumnies which were set on foot, on purpose to ren∣der the Christians odious; he gives an Answer to that Objection which was made to them, That they did not own the Pagan Deities, and that they did not offer up Sacrifices to them for the Prosperity of their Emperors; from whence they concluded, that they were guilty of Sacriledge and Treason. He answers in a word, that the Christians did not pay any Honour to the Gods of the Heathens, be∣cause they were not true Gods, and he appeals, for a Testimony of this, to the Consciences of the wisest of the Heathens themselves. He evidently demonstrates, that their pretended Gods were Men, and for the most part Criminals, that were dead, and that their Images cannot be Adored without the greatest Folly and Madness in the World, that even the Wisest of the Heathens despised them. He occasionally confutes what has been objected by some to the Christians, that they wor∣shipped an Asses Head, and adored Crosses. And from thence he takes occasion to explain the Doctrine of the Christians.

We Adore, says he, One only God, the Creator of the World, who is Invisible and Incomprehensible, who will Recompence Good Men with Everlasting Life, and Punish Wicked Men with Eternal Torments, after he has raised them from the Dead.

He proves this Truth by the whole Creation, which so evidently demonstrates that there is a God:

That it is, says he, the greatest Wickedness that can possibly be conceived, not to acknowledge him, of whom 'tis impossible that we can be ignorant, even by the very Dictates which Nature inspires into all Men, which oftentimes cause them to Invoke the True God, as when we say, If God thinks good, if God pleases, God sees us, and the like. And this he calls, The Testimony of a Soul that is natu∣rally Christian: Testimonium Animae naturaliter Christianae.

Lastly, by the Antiquity of the Books of Moses, which are more ancient than all the Writings of the Greeks, and by the Authority of the Prophets, who foretold those Things that were to come to pass. Then after having proved the Unity of God, which the Jews acknowledge as well as the Christians, he goes on to that Faith of Jesus Christ, which is peculiar to the Christians: He says, that the Christians do not look upon him as a mere Man, but as God, who is the WORD of God, begotten of the same Substance, that he is thus God and the Son of God, and that his Father and He are One; that the WORD coming down into the Womb of a Virgin, (as was formerly foretold) took Flesh upon him, and was born God-Man: He only desires them to consider it as a Fable like theirs till he has proved it by Invin∣cible Arguments: Which he presently does by the Authority of the Prophets, who have plainly foretold Jesus Christ by the Miracles which he wrought, by that extraordinary Eclipse which hap∣pened at his Death, that is taken notice of in the very Records of the Heathens; and lastly, by his Miraculous Resurrection.

And all these Things, says he, are Authorized by the Testimony of Pi∣late, who being already a Christian in his Heart, wrote them to Tiberius Caesar, and the Caesars had then been Christians, if it had been possible either that the World could subsist without Emperors, or that the Emperors could be Christians.

He adds to these Proofs, that of the Establishment of the Church notwithstanding Persecutions; and that which may be drawn from the Confession of the Heathen Gods, that is to say, the Daemons who submitted themselves to Jesus Christ, and were against their wills driven out of the Bodies of those that were Possessed only by the Name of Jesus Christ. And here he makes a Digression, to prove, that the Romans owed not their Greatness and Prosperity to their Gods; from whence he concludes, that the Christians are not guilty of Treason,

since the Gods, whom they will not own, have not any Power to Succour and Preserve the Empe∣rors.

But, says he, we Invoke for their Prosperity the Eternal, the True, and the Living God, who gave them their Life and their Empire, who alone has power over them, and who alone is above them; and after whom they are the Chiefest. They are Great, only because they acknow∣ledge themselves Inferior to him, Ideo magnus est, quia Coelo minor est. 'Tis this God to whom the Christians pray with their whole Hearts, for all the Emperors, that he would grant them a long Life, a peaceable Reign, a faithful Council, valiant Soldiers, an obedient People, and in a word, all that a Man and an Emperor can possibly desire.

He adds, that the Christians have greater Obliga∣tions upon them for the Performance of this, than other Men. First, because the Holy Scripture enjoyns them to it; and Secondly, because being perswaded that the World should end together with the Roman Empire, they desired to retard those Calamities which were to happen at the end of all Things, by praying for the Preservation of the Empire. That it is true, that the Christians do not swear by the Genii of the Caesars, nor by their Health, which is more precious than those Genii who are only Daemons, and that they do not Solemnize the Festivals of the Emperors, but that this is only for fear of falling into Idolatry. That in other things they are more Obedient, and better Subjects than other Men, though they have the Power in their hands, if they had a mind to defend them∣selves.

We have been, says he, but a little time in the World, yet we are to be met with in all places; you may find us in the Cities, in the Villages, in the Armies, in the Courts of Justice, in the Senate, and in the Markets. We have left you your Temples alone to your selves. What Wars might not we be capable of Undertaking? And with what Resolution might not we carry them on, though we had not near so many Troops as you; we, who die daily with so much Joy, were it not a Law amongst us to suffer our selves rather to be killed, than to kill others. Si non apud istam Disciplinam magis liceret occidi quam occidere.

But how could the Heathens object, That the diffe∣rence of Religion could cause any disturbance in the Commonwealth, or make Parties and Factions? He says, that the Christians have no Ambition, nor Pretentions in this World, as they are Christians, are so far from forming any Parties against the Government, that they think upon nothing less than State-Affairs. And that he might perswade the whole World of this Truth, see the Description which he makes of the Christians of his time, and of their Assemblies.

We make up, says he, a Body that is united by the Bond of the same Religion, the same Discipline, and the same Hope. We assemble our selves, and compose, if I may so say, a Body of an Army, to force Heaven by our Prayers, and this Violence is very acceptable to God. We pray not only for our selves, but also for the Emperors; for their Ministers, for the Magistrates, for the good of the State; for the Peace and Quietness of the Empire; and lastly, for the retarding the end of the World. Be∣sides, we assemble our selves to Read the Holy Scriptures according to our different Wants and Necessities, for our Instruction, and Information in our Duty. These Sacred Oracles are of signal Use for the preserving our Faith, the confirming our Hope, and the regulating our Manners, by the Meditation upon its Precepts. And 'tis in these Assemblies that the necessary Exhortations and Reproofs are to be expected. The Judgments which are there delivered, are given with all the Equity and Circumspection imaginable; because those who pass Judgment are verily perswaded, that Almighty God takes notice of them. Their Censures are all Divine, and 'tis a great Presump∣tion of God's future Judgment against any One, when he has committed any Sin, for which he deserves to be separated from the Communion of Bread, and from Prayer, and the Assembly of the Faithful; and in a word, to be deprived of all manner of Communion of holy Things. Those who preside among us, are the most Ancient, and such whose Probity is very well known; and this Honour is not to be purchased for Money, but it is bestowed upon pure Virtue, for all those Concerns which relate to God, are not to be valued at a Price. If we have any kind of Treasure, it is not to be look'd upon as a Blessing that is any ways dishonourable to our Reli∣gion, as if it was to be purchased upon any account. Every one contributes according to his Ability what Alms he pleases, and when he pleases, which yet is commonly done Month••y. None are compelled; every one gives freely what he will. These Contributions are the Contributions of Piety, for we do not employ them in making merry Meetings, or in other unnecessary Expen∣ces: But to maintain and bury Orphans, and poor People, to relieve old Men and infirm Persons, to assist the Faithful who are exiled into the Islands, or condemned to work in the Mines, or con∣fined in Prison, for having embraced the Faith of Jesus Christ. We all call our selves Brethren, not only because we are all Brethren by the Right of Nature, but because we all acknowledge One and the same God for our Father, because we have all one and the same Spirit which sancti∣fies us: And lastly, because all things are common among us, but our Women. Our Feasts are called Agapae, that is to say, Entertainments of Love and Charity. They were not Instituted for debauched Parasites, but for the Entertainment of the Poor, being assured that God has a more especial Regard for them. And if the Reason of the Institution of these Feasts is wholly Sacred, the Consequences of them are equally so. There is nothing here to be seen, that is any ways con∣trary to Civility and Modesty. They do not sit down at Table, till they have refreshed and nou∣rished the Soul by Prayer, they eat no more than what is necessary to suffice Nature, and they drink no more than what is fitting and convenient for chaste and regular Persons; they take care not to glut themselves, so as to hinder their rising in the night to worship God. They discourse of such things as are profitable, because they look upon themselves, as in the Presence of God, who is a Witness of every thing that we say. The Supper is concluded with Prayer, and they do not break up in a Tumult or Disorder; but they retire regularly and with great modesty, as it is not hard for

such Persons to do, who take greater care to nourish their Souls, with that holy Discipline, in which they are instructed, than their Bodies with the Victuals which they eat.

After having thus described the Assemblies of the Christians, he shews, that those Calamities and Misfortunes which happen in the World, are unjustly attributed to them, as if they were the cause of them. He maintains, that 'tis these are the Men who divert and prevent them, and that they are very far from being any ways the occasion of attracting them. He concludes, by proving that we admire those Virtues in the Philo∣sophers, which are discernable in a much more excellent and higher Degree in the Christians.

The Two Books to the Nations are almost of the very same Subject with the Apology. And Tertullian repeats therein the greatest part of the things which he had said before in his Apology, but he puts them in another Order, explaining and enlarging upon them: So that the difference between these two Books is this, that the first is written with Heat, and without much Study; and the second is a Methodical Treatise, and composed with great Consideration. The Second Book to the Nations was written against the false Gods of the Heathens, wherein he gave an exact Account of the Deities of the several prophane Religions, and shewed how exceedingly foolish a thing it is to own them; but this Book is so imperfect, and there is so little Coherence in all that we have extant of it, that it cannot be of any great advantage to us.

In the Book of The Testimony of the Soul, he enlarges upon one Proof for Religion, which he had advanced before in his Apology, that the Soul does naturally, and even against its will, acknowledge, that there is but one God, and that there is another Life after this. He proves it by those Notions which Nature hath inspired into us, and which are so deeply engraven in our Minds, that nothing is able to efface them: So that they often come from a Man, when he thinks of them the least. As when one says without any reflection, God grant it, what pleases God, God help me, good God, &c. Expressions that manifestly suppose, that the Soul is penetrated with the knowledge of a God, as the Fear which we naturally have of Death, the desire of leaving behind us a Name to Posterity, and that Compassion which we have for the Dead do evidently suppose, that there is another Life after this. Now these Notions being natural to the Soul, and to be found in every Body, it must necessa∣rily follow, that they come from God. And this is the Subject which Tertullian enlarges upon very ingeniously in this little Treatise.

The Book to Scapula, was composed to dissuade the Governour of Africa from the Persecution which he had raised against the Christians. He begins, by representing to him, that the Christians rather wished for Martyrdom, than feared it; and that therefore it was not out of any Apprehension he had of them, that induced him to direct this Discourse to him, but the earnest Desire which he had for the Salvation of the Heathens, because the Religion of the Christians obliges them to love their Enemies, and to endeavour to convert them from the Error wherein they are at present. He afterwards tells him, that the Christians adore that God whom Mankind knows by Nature; he represents to him, that it ought to be left to the free Direction of Men to embrace that Religion, which seems to them to be most agreeable to Truth: That another Man's Religion does neither hurt nor good to any body: That it is not an Act of Religion to constrain Men to embrace a Religion, which they ought to chuse voluntarily. * 1.33 Non est Religionis cogere Religionem, quae sponte suscipi debet, non vi. He adds, that the Life of Christians is unblameable; that they pay an entire Obedience to the Emperors; that they were never found engaged in a Party with the Rebels.

They are, says he, Enemies to no Man, and least of all to the Emperor, very well knowing, that it is their God who has established him, they love, honour, and respect him, most heartily wishing his Preservation, and that of the Empire, as long as the World shall continue; We therefore honour the Emperor after that manner, which is lawful for us, and which only can be of advantage to him; that is to say, as a Man who is next under God, and who has received from God every thing that he has. We likewise offer Sacrifices for his safety, but they are the Sacrifices of Prayer: For God does not stand in need of Incense, nor of the Blood of Victims.

After having thus vindicated the Christians from the Crime of High-Treason, he dissuades Scapula from the Persecution against Christians, by the Examples of those who have been punished for persecuting of them, and likewise by the Examples of those who have had so much moderation, as to permit them to enjoy their Liberty and Tranquility. And these are the Books written by Tertullian, in defence of the Christian Religion against the Gentiles.

There is but one Book of his against the Jews, wherein, First, he proves, that the Law of Moses, and its Ceremonies, were established but for a time, and that they were to cease at the coming of Jesus Christ. And Secondly, that the Messiah expected by the Jews, and foretold by the Prophets is already come, and that this is Jesus Christ. Which he evidently makes out from the Prophets, who foretold the time of his Coming, and the circumstances of his Life and Death. He observes, that the Original of the Jews mistake arose from their confounding his last Coming, wherein he will appear in great Power and Glory, with his first Coming, wherein he was seen in great Humility, and took upon him the mean Condition of other Men.

Although the Book of Praescriptions against the Hereticks is not, in the order of Time, the first that Tertullian has written against them, yet it is so, as to the Order of the Matters which it contains; because it is designed against all Heresies in general, whereas the others are only against some par∣ticular Heresie. This Book is entituled, Of Praescriptions, or rather, Of Praescription against the Hereticks; because herein he shews, that their Doctrine is not to be admitted by reason of its No∣velty. Before he enters upon the Matter, he endeavours to obviate the Scandal of those, who

admire, how there could be any Heresies in the World, how they could have been so great and so powerful, and how it comes to pass, that so many considerable Persons in the Church, have been se∣duced to embrace them, by shewing that Heresies have been foretold, that they are necessary Evils for the Tryal of our Faith, and that we must not judge of Faith by Persons, but of Persons by their Faith; Ex personis probamus fidem, an ex fide personas? After having given this necessary Caution, he lays down the first Principle of Prescription.

We are not allowed, says he, to introduce any thing that is new in Religion, nor to chuse by our selves, what another has invented. We have the Apo∣stles of our Lord for Founders, who were not themselves the Inventors, and Authors of what they have left us; but they have faithfully taught the World the Doctrine which they received from Je∣sus Christ. Heresies have risen from Philosophy and humane Wisdom, which is quite different from the Spirit of Christianity. We are not allowed to entertain our Curiosity, nor to enquire af∣ter any thing that is beyond what we have been taught by Jesus Christ and his Gospel, Nobis curiosi∣tate opus non est post Christum Jesum, nec inquisitione post Evangelium. And when we have once be∣lieved, we are to give credit to nothing any farther than as we have already believed.

And here it is, that he Answers the Objection of the Hereticks, who urged this Passage of Scripture, Seek and you shall find: by telling us, that it is not permitted to seek when we have once found, that it would be a Labour to no purpose, to seek for Truth among all the Heresies; and lastly, that if it be per∣mitted to seek, it is after having admitted the Rule, that is to say, the principal Articles of Faith, which are contained in the Creed. But as the Hereticks did often alledge the Holy Scripture, in Defence of themselves; he proves that the Church was not obliged to enter into a Discussion of those Passages which they quoted; that this way of confuting them is very tedious, and difficult, because they do not acknowledge all the Books of the Scriptures, or else they corrupt them, or put a false Interpretation upon them; which renders the Victory that is to be obtained over them uncertain and difficult. He says then, that it is to better purpose to understand perfectly, who it is, that is in Pos∣session of the Faith of Jesus Christ; who those Persons are, to whom the Scriptures were committed in Trust; and who are the first Authors who have given an Account of our Religion. He goes back even to Jesus Christ, who is the Source and Original of this Religion, and to the Apostles who re∣ceived it from him. He shews that it is impossible, that the Apostles should preach any other Do∣ctrine, than that of Jesus Christ, and that all the Apostolical Churches should embrace any other Faith, than that which the Apostles had delivered to them; from whence he concludes, that it must of necessity follow, that that Doctrine, which is Conformable to that, which is found to be the Faith of all the Churches, must be that which was taught by Jesus Christ: and that on the contrary, that that which is opposite thereto, must be a Novel Doctrine. He farther confounds the Hereticks by the Novelty of their Opinions. It is evident, says he, that the most ancient Doctrine is that of Jesus Christ, and by consequence that alone is true, and that, that on the contrary, which had not any Date till after his Ascension, must be false and supposititious. Having laid down this infallible Rule, he proves the Doctrine of the Hereticks to be of a later Date than that of the Church, because the Au∣thors of the Heresies were after the Establishment of the Church, from which they have separated themselves. That the several Sects of the Hereticks cannot reckon their Original from the time of the Apostles, nor shew a Succession of Bishops, from their Times, as the Apostolical Churches can, with whom they do not communicate. That though they could pretend to such a Succession, yet the No∣velty of their Doctrine condemned by the Apostles, and the Apostolical Churches would convince them of being Cheats and Impostors, and that what they have added, taken away, or changed in the Books of the Holy Scripture, does farther discover, that they invented their Doctrine after these Books were composed. That lastly, their Discipline and Conduct, which is absolutely Humane, and Earthly, without Order, and without Rule, renders them every way contemptible. I have exactly set down the Reasonings of Tertullian in this Work; because, as he himself observes, they are not ••nly proper to confute the Heresies that were in his Time, but also to disprove all those that sprang ••p afterwards, or that should arise hereafter, even to the end of the Church.

I shall not enlarge so much upon the Works which were written against those Heresies which ••re now extinct. The most considerable, is, that which he composed against Marcion, which is di∣sided into Five Books. This Heretick maintained that there were two Principles, or two Gods; the ••e Good, and the other Evil; The one Perfect, and the other Imperfect; that this last is the God whom the Jews worship, who created the World, and delivered the Law to Moses; whereas the first 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Father of Jesus Christ, whom he sent to destroy the Works of the Evil One; that is to say, ••e Law and the Prophets, which Marcion rejected. He affirmed likewise, that Jesus Christ was not ••loathed with true Flesh. And by consequence, that he did not suffer really, but only in appearance. ••hese are the Errors which Tertullian confutes in this Work. In the First Book, he shews that the un∣••nown God of Marcion, is only a Fantastical and Imaginary Being. In the Second he proves that, •…•…at God the Creator of the World, whom the Jews worshipped, is the Only true God, and the Au∣••••or of all Good. After having demonstrated this Truth by invincible Arguments, he resolves those ••ifficulties which are raised by the Marcionites against God's Conduct in the Old Testament, He ex∣•…•…ains for Example, Why he has permitted Sin? Why he suffers Sinners? Why he punishes Men so •…•…erely? Why he seems sometimes to alter his Conduct and Design, &c. In the Third Book he ••ews, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, who is the Creator of the World, and the Author of the •…•…w, that he has been foretold by the Prophets, and that he took upon him true Flesh, by taking •…•…on him our Nature. In the Fourth Book he shews, that it is the same God, both in the Old and the New Testament. He reconciles the pretended Contradictions alledged by Marcion, and shews

that the whole Life of Jesus Christ was foretold, and figured in the Old Testament. That Jesus Christ has explained the Prophets, and perfected the Precepts of the Law. In a word he proves at the end of this Book, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the Creator of the World, by the Doctrine of the Prophets, by his own Doctrine, by his Inclinations, by his Virtues, by his Opini∣ons; and lastly, by his Resurrection. In the Last Book, he shews from the Epistles of St. Paul, that it is the same God, that is preached both in the Old, and in the New Testament, and that Jesus Christ is the Son of the Creator of the World. There are in this Book two difficult Passages concerning the Eucharist, which have given Subject to very great Disputes; of which I shall not speak in this Place, contenting my self to refer the Reader to those, who have discoursed of them at large, that so I may pass on to the other Works of Tertullian.

After having maintained the Unity of God against Marcion; he defends the Trinity of Persons against Praxeas. This Heretick came from Asia, to diffuse the Poison of his Errror in Rome; he was nam∣rally of a very unquiet and uneasie Temper, and besides was vainly puft up with the false Opinion of being a Martyr, which Quality he took upon him, because he was for a short time imprisoned for the Faith. Being come to Rome, under the Pontificate of Victor, he prevented this Pope from acknow∣ledging the New Prophecies of Montanus, besides he made him, if we believe Tertullian, revoke the Communicatory Letters which he had granted to the Montanists. He begun to divulge his Heresie in the City of Rome, and afterwards went into Africa; where he made some Proselytes; but he was convinced by a Catholick (which without doubt must be Tertullian) and obliged to put down in Writing a Recantation of his Error. So after he had concealed his Doctrine for some time, he pub∣lished it anew, and Tertullian, who had confuted him before, whilst he was yet a Catholick, wrote a∣gainst him, after he fell into the Error of the Montanists. He establishes in this Book, the Distincti∣on of the WORD, and the Trinity of Persons against the Heresie of Praxeas, who acknowledged but one Person in God, making no Distinction between the Father and the Son, and by consequence maintained, that the Father made himself Man, and suffered for Us. Tertullian opposes to him the Rule of Faith, which obliges us to acknowledge only one God in Three Persons, which are all Three of the same Substance, and have all one and the same Power, and that it was the Person of the Son, who was incarnate, and dyed for Us. He shews that this Trinity of Persons, does no ways prejudice the Unity of the Godhead, as the Unity of the Godhead does no ways hinder the Trinity of Persons That the Son is of the Substance of the Father, and that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father by the Son. That the WORD which was from all Eternity in God, and who did, as it were, come out of him to create and govern the World, as a Person subsisting, who nevertheless has not a different Sub∣stance from that of the Father, so that it does not follow from hence, that we believe two Gods, and two Lords; that it is the Son, and not the Father, who made himself Man, without ceasing to be God, and that the Properties of humane Nature, are only to be found in Jesus Christ. In a Word, he ex∣plains very handsomely in this Treatise, the Faith of the Church, concerning the Mysteries of the Tri∣nity and the Incarnation. It must be owned, that in some Places he expresses himself after a manner, not very agreeable to that which has been used in the following Ages. ii 1.34 But we must pardon these kind of Expressions in the Ancients, who wrote before those Terms, which they made use of, were fixt and limited to a certain Sense.

But it is a difficult Matter to excuse him, where he seems to assert, as well in this Book, as in other Places of his Works, that God had a Body, or rather that he was Corporeal. Yet there are some Authors that vindicate him from this Error, and this has occasioned a Question, which is so common, and if I may say it, so trivial, that I do not think it necessary to say any thing of it in this Place.

Hermogenes was another African Heretick, who maintained that Matter was Eternal, and that God did not create it when he made the World, but that he only made use thereof, to form things as we see. He suckt this Error from the Philosophy of the Stoicks, and defended it by Syllogis•…•…, connected according to their Methods of Reasoning, which made Tertullian say in the Treatise which

he composed against him, that the Philosophers were the Patriarchs of the Hereticks. He there dis∣covers the Fallacies of the Sophisms of this Heretick, and shews that our Religion teaches us, that God created even that Matter, whereof he made the World.

The Book against the Valentinians, is rather a Satyr and Raillery, than a serious Confutation of the Extravagant Sentiments of these Hereticks. Valentinus, the first Author of this Sect, separated from the Church out of spight, because hoping to be Elected a Bishop, by reason of his Wit and Eloquence, he was put by to prefer another Person, who had suffered for the Faith of Jesus Christ in times of Per∣secution. After he had separated from the Church, he invented, or rather revived an old Opinion, according to the Principles of which, he feigned a Succession, and imaginary Generation of a kind of Deities. His Disciples refined upon his Notion, and formed quite different Systems. But as all these Fancies were impertinent and ridiculous, so they took great Care to conceal them, lest if they should discover them, all the World should be presently sensible of their Extravagancy: 'Tis this which Tertullian upbraids them with.

If you teach the Truth, says he to them, why don't you discover it? It persuades by teaching, and it teaches by persuading; it is not ashamed of shewing it self; on the contrary, 'tis ashamed of nothing, but of being concealed. You reproach us for our Simplicity; it is true, we love it, because it is by this means, that we know, and make known the Will of God.

But 'tis no wonder that the Hereticks should blame this Simplicity, and should so carefully conceal their Principles; for they were so extravagant, that the bare Discovering of them would be sufficient to render them ridiculous: 'Tis this which Tertullian does in this Work.

I undertake; says he in this Book, to discover to the Eyes of all Men, the hidden Mystery; but though I profess to relate the Opinions of these Hereticks, without making a particular Confutation, yet I hope I shall be pardoned, if I cannot forbear censuring them in some Places. What I do is nothing but a Sport before a real Combat, I shall rather shew them where I could strike them, than lay them on. But if there are found some Passages that may excite Laughter, 'tis because the very Subject causes it. There are many things which deserve to be jeered and ridiculed at this rate, lest if we should confute them seriously, we should seem to lay too great Stress upon them. Nothing is more due to Vanity than Laughter, and to Laugh, does properly belong to the Truth, because it is pleasant▪ and to Sport with its Enemies, because it is certain of the Victory.

And these are all the Books which are particularly against the Hereticks; there are others, in which Tertullian likewise confutes some Errors, and defends some Catholick Truths, though they were not written against any Hereticks in particular. Such are the following Books.

The Book of the Flesh of Jesus Christ. wherein he proves against the Hereticks Marcion, Apelles▪ and Valentinus, that Jesus Christ took upon him true Flesh, like to ours, in the Womb of the Virgin.

The Title alone of the Book of the Resurrection of the Flesh, is enough to discover, that it was written against the Sadducees, and against the Hereticks who denied the Resurrection.

The Scorpiacus, so called, because it is a Remedy against the Poison of Hereticks, like Scorpions, defends the Necessity and Excellency of Martyrdom against the Gnosticks.

The Book of the Soul, written against the Opinions of the Philosophers, and the Hereticks, treats at large of the Nature of the Soul, and its Qualities. But it is full of false Principles and Errors. He pretends that the Soul is Corporeal, and that it takes a certain Form of a Body, though it be invisi∣ble; he confutes the Opinion of Plato, concerning Reminiscency, or the Faculty of Remembring, and Py∣thagoras's Transmigration; he affirms, that the Soul does not come from Heaven, but that it is form∣ed with the Body, and that as the Body of the Parents produces a Body, so their Soul produces a Soul. That all Souls, and even those of the Martyrs, which some have excepted, are disposed of af∣ter Death, in a certain Subterraneous Place, where they receive Refreshment, and Torment, accord∣ing to the Good or Evil which they have done: And that they expect the Resurrection, and the Day of Judgment, which will render them entirely happy, or entirely Miserable to all Eternity. There are likewise in this Treatise, some other particular Opinions; as for Instance, that the Soul and Breath are the same thing; that that which is unreasonable in the Soul, comes from the Devil; that every Soul has its Daemon; that all Dreams are not vain.

The Book of Baptism is divided into two Parts; the First relating to Doctrine, and the Second to Discipline. In the First he defends the Necessity and Efficacy of the Sacrament of Baptism against the Hereticks called Caiannites; he proves that the Waters of Baptism do procure to us Forgiveness of our Sins, and of the Punishment which they deserve.

What can there be, says he, more miracu∣lous, than to see that by washing the Body by an external Baptism, we efface at the same time, the Mortal Stain of the Soul, and when that Stain is once taken away, the Punishment is likewise re∣mitted to us?

He afterwards discourses of the Imposition of Hands, and of the Unction which fol∣lowed after Baptism, to make the Holy Ghost descend upon the Faithful, and to draw down upon them the Blessings of Heaven.

We do not receive, says he, the Fulness of the Holy Ghost by Wa∣ter; but it prepares us for receiving it by washing us from our Sins. And as St. John prepared the Way of the Lord, so the Angel which is present in Baptism, prepares the Way for the Holy Ghost, by the Absolution of our Sins, which we obtain by Faith, which is confirmed and sealed by the Invocation of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. When we come out of the Font we are anointed; and this Unction, which is performed on our Flesh, is profitable to our Soul, as external Baptism has a spiritual Effect, which is to deliver us from our Sins. Afterwards, there is the Laying on of Hands, to draw upon us the Holy Ghost, and this most Holy Spirit descends voluntarily from Heaven, into purified and blessed Bodies.

In the Second Part, he discourses of several Questions

concerning Baptism, which relate to Discipline. The first is concerning the Baptism of St. John, whe∣ther it were from Heaven, or from Earth? He says, that it was from Heaven, because it was or∣dained by Heaven: However, That it did not bestow any thing that was Heavenly, but that it made way for Heavenly things, by bringing us to Repentance; and that it neither conferred the Ho∣ly Ghost, nor Remission of Sins. The Second, is concerning the Necessity of Baptism, upon which he starts a considerable Objection, taken from what there might seem that the Apostles, of whose Sal∣vation no doubt can be made, were never Baptized. To this he Answers, That possibly they might have been Baptized, though we find no mention of it; and in the Second place, that that Familiarity which they had with Jesus Christ, the Greatness of their Faith, and the Ardency of their Charity, might supply in them the Defect of Baptism, since Jesus Christ has promised the Remission of Sins, and Salvation to those Persons who had Faith, though they were not Baptized. That nevertheless, there is no doubt to be made, but that at present, Baptism is necessary to Salvation, and that though formerly a Man might be saved only by Faith in one God, yet that now we must believe in Jesus Christ, and that it was necessary, that this Faith should be sealed by Baptism, that Jesus Christ had made a Law for it, and prescribed the Manner, saying, Go and teach all Nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. And that this Sentence of the Gospel: If a Man be not born again of Water, and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, does invincibly establish the Necessity of Baptism.

The Third Question is, Whether one may Baptize more than once? He says expresly, that there is but one Baptism, that it never ought to be reiterated. He excepts however the Baptism of Here∣ticks; Who, says he, are not able to give it, because they have it not. And therefore it is that we have a Rule among us to Re-baptize them. He adds, that Martyrdom is a kind of Second Baptism, which is instead of the Baptism of Water, when any Person has not received it, and which repairs it, when that Grace is lost, which it conferred.

The Fourth Question, is concerning the Minister of Baptism: He says, the Bishop has Power of Administring it, and after him the Priests and Deacons; nevertheless, with his Permission, to set a higer Value on the Priesthood. That in * 1.35 Case of Necessity, any Man may administer it, and that we should be Guilty of the Loss of a Soul, if we did not afford it that Grace, whereby it may be saved; there are none but Women, to whom he seems absolutely to prohibit the Administring of Baptism, in any Circumstance whatsoever.

The Fifth Reflection, is concerning the Condition of those who are to receive Baptism. He says, that it is not to be Administred rashly, and that it is good sometimes to put some Stop to it, that those who receive it may be the better disposed. He would chiefly have this Discipline observed in respect to In∣fants, and though he supposes that they are capable of receiving Baptism, yet he will not allow them to be Baptized without Necessity.

What Necessity is there, says be, to expose God-fathers to the Hazard of Answering for those whom they hold at the Fonts; since they may be prevented by Death, from being able to perform those Promises which they have made for the Children, or else may be disappointed by their Evil Inclinations. Jesus Christ says, indeed, Hinder not little Children from coming to me; but that they should come to him as soon as they are advanced in Years as soon as they have leart their Religion, when they may be taught whither they are going, when they are be∣come Christians, when they begin to be able to know Jesus Christ. What is there that should com∣pel this innocent Age to receive Baptism? And since they are not yet allowed the Disposal of Tem∣poral Goods, is it reasonable that they should be entrusted with the Concerns of Heaven? For the same Reason, he farther says, it is proper to make those, who are not Married, wait for some time, by reason of the Temptations which they have to undergo till they are Married, or have attained to the Gift of Continency. Lastly, he says, Those who shall duely consider the great weight and Moment of this Divine Sacrament, will rather be afraid of making too much haste to receive it, than to defer it for some time, that so they may be the better capable of receiving it more worthily.

The Sixth, Is concerning the proper time for Administring of Baptism. He says, That it may be done at any time; but that the solemn Days for performing it, are the Times of Easter and Penticost.

Lastly, he says, That those who are desirous to dip themselves Holily in this Water, must prepare themselves for it by Fastings, by Watchings, by Prayers, and by sincere Repentance.

And this is what the Second Part contains, wherein there are but two Errors, the First whereof concerning the Baptism of Hereticks, is common to him, with several others; and the Second, which relates to the Baptism of Infants, is particular to him alone, and we shall not find any of the Anci∣ents speaking after the same manner.

The Book of Penance is the First of those which relate meerly to the Discipline of the Church; therein he distinguishes two sorts of Penance; the first is that which is performed before Baptism; and the second is that of those, who being so unhappy, as to fall into Enormous Sins after Baptism, do recover themselves by a laborious Penance. In the First Part, he shews the Necessity there is of proving and preparing Ones self, for a long time, for the Reception of this Grace of Baptism, by a true Repentance. He fears not to say, that Baptism is to no purpose, if we have not repented of our Sins, and amended them, and that it is great Presumption to imagine, that having led a disorderly Course of Life till the very Day of Baptism, we should be made Holy all of a sudden, and that we

should cease from Sinning immediately after we have received this Sacrament.

Can it be believed, says he, that the Reformation is made just at the time when we are absolved? No certainly, it is made at the time when the Pardon is yet in suspence, and that we are afraid still of the Punishment, though we had not as yet deserved to be delivered from our Sins, that we might be in a Capacity of deserving it. When God still threatens us, and not when he has pardoned us—I confess that God grants Remission of Sins, to those who receive Baptism, but they must take Pains to be made worthy of it; for who would be so bold, as to confer this Sacrament on a Person, of whose Repen∣tance he has any reason to make a Doubt. You may impose upon the Minister, and so procure Bap∣tism, by false Pretences; but God, who knows the Hearts, keeps his own Treasures himself, and does not grant his Grace, but only to those that are worthy of it; so that none can imagine that he may sin more freely, because being yet but a Catechumen, he shall receive the Remission of his Sins in Baptism; for this Sacrament is the Seal of Faith, and Repentance is the Beginning and Stamp of Faith. Lastly, We are not washt from our Pollutions by Baptism, only that we might sin no more, but because we have our Heart already purified: Quia jam corde loti sumus.

The Second Part of this Treatise, is of Penance after Baptism, called Exomologesis. He declares at first, that he finds it difficult to discourse of this Second Repentance, which is the last Hope that remains to those who have committed any Crimes, that is to say, Enormous Sins after Baptism:

Lest, says he, by treating of this new Means of recovering our selves from Sin, which God offers to us; it might seem as if we would open a Way for Sinning afresh. However, he says, that God foreseeing Man's Infirmities, and the Devil's Temptations, was willing, that though the Gate of Remission was shut, and the Grace of Baptism refused for ever to those who had forfeited their Baptismal Innocence; they should yet have one Remedy left, which is a Second Repentance, but that it is granted to them but once. He afterwards describes the laborious Exercises of this publick Penance, called Exomo∣logesis. 'Tis, says he, an Exercise instituted to humble and abase the Sinner. It makes him lead a Life that is proper to prevail with God for Mercy; it makes him lie in Sack-cloth, and upon Ashes, entirely to neglect his own Body; it overwhelms his Mind with Grief and Sorrow; it reduces him to drink nothing but Water, and to eat nothing but Bread, and to take no more than what is necessa∣ry for his Sustenance; it obliges him to prolong his Prayers, and to feed them, if I may so say, by Fastings: It causes him to break out into Sighs, Groans and Tears, to cry Day and Night to the Lord, to cast himself at the Priest's Feet, and to prostrate himself before God's Favourites. Last∣ly, To conjure all his Brethren to pray to God for him, and to appease his Wrath by their Prayers.

After having thus described the Fatigues of this Exomologesis, he shews the Necessity of it, and reproves those who were ashamed to embrace it, when they had committed Sins after Baptism.

His Book of Prayer, is a Discourse partly Moral, partly Ecclesiastical; for in the First Part, he ex∣plains the Lord's Prayer; and in the Second, he discourses of some particular Ceremonies, used in the Prayers of the Christians. First, He advises the Christians to be reconciled to their Brethren, to free their Minds from all sort of Trouble and Passion, to purifie their Hearts from all Sin, before they be∣take themselves to Prayer; Secondly, He says that the Christians do not use to wash their Hands before Prayer, but that in Praying, they commonly lift them up towards Heaven. Thirdly, That it is not necessary to take off our Cloaks when we Pray, nor to sit always after Prayer. Fourthly, That we ought to pray with a modest Countenance, lifting our Hands towards Heaven. Fifthly, That our Voices must be low, that we must not speak louder than is necessary, to be heard. For, says he, it is not the Sound of our Words that God gives ear unto; but he regards the Intention of our Heart. Sixthly, That when we fast in private, and for the sake of Devotion, we must not abstain from the Kiss of Peace, as when it is a solemn Fast against the time of Easter. Seventhly, That the Stationary Days, that is to say, those Days when several of the Faithful continued in Prayer and Fasting till Three a Clock in the Afternoon; we must not abstain from assisting at the ordinary Prayers, as if it was necessary to break our Fast, as soon as we have received the Body of Jesus Christ.

Your Stati∣on, says he, will be more solemn. Receive the Lord's Body, and keep it, and so you shall be Par∣takers of the Sacrifice, and you will perform your Devotion the better.

In his Book concerning Idolatry, he shews, that the Crime of Idolatry is not only committed by Sa∣crificing to Idols, but also several other ways, of which he gives us a very pretty Account. He pre∣tends, that all those Workmen who make Pictures, representing the False Gods; that the Astrolo∣gers, who have given to the Planets the Names of the Heathen Gods, and who attribute to them any Power and Efficacy; Professors of Rhetorick, who commend the Gods of the Heathens; the Mer∣chants, that furnish Commodities for the Adorning the Temples, and offering Sacrifices to the Gods, are all guilty of Idolatry. He maintains that it is not lawful for the Christians to Feast on those Days which the Pagans Solemnize in Honour of their Gods, nor to adorn their Houses with Torches and Laurels, in Honour of their Princes and magistrates; that they may be allowed to go to the Weddings of their Kinsfolks, though Sacrifices be offered there; but that this is only to satisfie that Duty to which we were obliged, upon the Account of our Relation. That it is likewiise lawful for Servants to follow their Masters to the Sacrifices, and for Christians to render to Heathen Emperors that which is their Due. But that they ought not to accept of Offices, nor bear Arms, at least, that they cannot do it without countenancing of Idolaty. Lastly, He does not acquit those of Idolatry, who attribute the Name of God to the pretended Deities of the Heathens, or who swear by their Name, whether it be through Custom or otherwise. And all this is grounded upon this most certain Principle, That all those who any ways favour the Wicked in their Vice, or contribute to Wicked∣ness in any manner whatsoever, are themselves guilty; but Tertullian seems to stretch it a little too

far in some Particulars, and to lay too great a S••••••ss upon the Rigour of Things which might be ex∣cused: As for Example, To bear Arms for the Defence of the Empire, to Adorn their Houses with Torches and Laurels, in Honour of their Princes▪ and to make use of some ways of Speaking that are Customary, though they may have some Affinity to Idolaty.

And to the same purpose, defending in his Book De Coronâ Militu, the Action of a Soldier, who had refused to put a Crown upon his Head; he maintains that it is absolutely prohibited to the Christians to Crown themselves, and even to bear Arms He speaks in this Discourse very advantageously of Custom and Tradition, and relates several remarkable Examples of Ceremonies, which he pretends to be deriv∣ed from Tradition.

To begin, says he, with Baptism, when we are ready to enter into the Water, and even before we make our Protestations before the Bishop, and in the Church, That we renounce the Devil all his Pomps and Mini••••es; afterwards we are plunged in the Water three times, and they make us answer to some Things which are not precisely set down in the Gospel; after that they make us taste Milk and Honey, and we bath our selves every day, during that whole Week. We receive the Sacra∣ment of the Eucharist, instituted by Jesus Christ, when we Eat, and in the Morning-Assemblies, and we do not Receive it, but from the Hands of those that preside there. We offer Yearly Oblations for the Dead, in Honour of the Martyrs. We believe that it is not lawful to Fast on a Sunday, and to pray to God kneeling. From Easter to Whitsontide we enjoy the same Priviledge. We take great Care not to suffer any Part of the Wine and Consecrated Bread to fall to the Ground. We often Sign our selves with the Sign of the Cross; if you demand a Law for these Practises, taken from the Scripture, we cannot find one there; but we must answer, That 'tis Tradition that has established them, Custom that has authorized them, and Faith that has made them to be observed.

The Book concerning Flight in time of Persecution, is a further Mark of the Extream Rigour of Ter∣tullian, for there he maintains, That it is absolutely Prohibited to Fly in time of Persecution, or to give Money not to be Persecuted.

The Book De Pallio, is a small Treatise, wherein he endeavours to prove, that he had reason to quit the Toga, or the long Roman Gown, and to wear a Cloak; he shews therein a great deal of Wit and Learning, and it seems as if he Composed it, rather to shew what he was capable of saying upon so trivial a Subject as this is, than seriously to defend the Action.

In his Book concerning Publick Sights and Spectacles, he dissuades the Christians from those Sights and Spectacles, shewing how these Pleasures are both shameful and dangerous to those who have Re∣nounced the Pomps and Pleasures of the World, and Idolatry.

There is no need of giving the Reasons why he wrote those Books concerning the Ornaments and Dresses of Women, since the Titles themselves do sufficiently shew against what Abuse they were writ∣ten: So likewise the Title of the Book, that Virgins ought to be Veiled, does discover the Subject; but we are not to understand it only of Virgins Consecrated to God; for Tertullian's Design is to prove, that young Women should be Veiled, that is to say, that they should have their Face covered in the Church: Which he undertakes to prove, contrary to the Custom of his Country, where only marri∣ed Women were veiled. And upon this Account he speaks against this Custom; and maintains, that it cannot prescribe against Truth; which is true, when it relates to Doctrine, but not when it con∣cerns only a Matter of Discipline, which is but of little Consequence.

In the First Book written to his Wife, he Exhorts her not to Marry again; and in the Second, he Advises her, that in case she will Marry again, to take a Christian for her Husband.

The Treatise of Patience is an excellent Exhortation to the Practice of this Virtue: In which Dis∣course, Tertullian sets forth with a great deal of Eloquence, all the Motives and Arguments which might induce Christians to Patience, and dissuade them from Impatience.

The Discourse directed to the Confessors whom he calls Martyrs according to the ancient way of speak∣ing, is likewise a very powerful Exhortation to those who were in Prison upon the Account of the Religi∣on of Jesus Christ, to encourage them to bear with Patience their Chains and Torments, and to perse∣vere with Constancy to the End; nothing can be more Pathetical and Moving than this little Discourse.

I have now nothing more to do, but to speak of those Books which Tertullian Composed against the Church, in Defence of the Montanists, and they are Four: His Book of Modesty, of Monogamy, an Exhortation to Chastity, and A Treatise of Fasts. In his Book of Modesty, he endeavours to prove against the Church, that it has no Power to Remit the Sins of Fornicators and Adulterers, and that when Men are once fallen into these Crimes after Baptism, they cannot be any more admitted into the Communion of the Church, how Penitent soever they may be. In his Book of Monogamy, and the Exhortation to Chastity, he absolutely condemns second Marriages, as being Adultery. Lastly, In his Discourse of Fasts, he commends the Excessive Fasts of the Montanists, who made several Lents, observing the Stationary Fasts, as if they had been expresly enjoyned, making them to continue till Night, and not eating upon those Days any thing but Bread and Fruits, nor drinking any thing but Water. In all these Books, excepting his Book of Exhortation to Chastity, he formally attacks the Church, and the Catholicks, whom he calls Psychici, and speaks every where very advantageously of Montanus and his Prophetesses, believing that the Holy Ghost had inspired them to set up and esta∣blish a more perfect Discipline. For as to what relates to the Rule of Faith, that is to say, to the principal Doctrines of Religion, Tertullian and the first Montanists were of the same Opinion with the Church: And therefore it is, that in this Book against Praxeas, he says, that he always believed in One only God, in three Persons, and that he still believes it more firmly, since he has been in∣structed by the Paraclete or Comforter: And in his Book which he wrote, to prove that Virgins ought to be Veil'd, he says, that excepting the Rule of Faith, which is immoveable, and can no ways be changed, Manners and Customs that relate to Matter of Discipline may be reformed and

altered. That it is this which the Paraclet has done by the Ministry of Montanus, who has in∣structed Men in a much more perfect Discipline than that which the Apostles had taught them, that Ju∣stice was with him in the Cradle while he was an Infant: That the Law and the Prophets were as it were the Infancy, that the Gospel was as it were the Youth, but that there was no compleat Per∣fection to be found, but in the Instructions of the Holy Ghost, who spake by Montanus; for Tertulli∣an and the first Montanists do not believe that Montanus was the Holy Ghost, but only that the Holy Ghost had inspired him, and sent him to Reform and Perfect the Discipline of the Church; and they did not attribute this Priviledge only to Montanus, but also to several of his Disciples, and prin∣cipally to Women; and they would have it believed, that there were among them several Persons who had Revelations, and prophesied Things to come. These Persons were sometimes strangely agi∣tated, sometimes they fell into an Extasie. This Sect gave a respectful Attention to all that they said, either while they were thus agitated, or after they came to themselves, as it was believed that these were so many Revelations, of which it was not lawful to make any doubt; they allowed them to speak in their Assemblies when they would, and they believed that they had more Power and Au∣thority than Priests and Bishops. And this was the Reason that there was but very little Order and Rule observed in their Assemblies. But as to other things, they practised a very severe and austere Discipline; they for ever condemned not only those, who after their Baptism had committed Mur∣der or Idolatry, but also those who had fallen into Fornication and Adultery, to ••ye under a per∣petual Excommunication; They imposed new Fasts, and observed them very strictly, eating nothing but Bread and Fruits. They Condemned second Marriages; and they believed that it was not law∣ful to flee in Times of Persecution. As soon as ever this Sect appeared in the World, it deluded a great many Christians by that outward Shew of Perfection and Sanctity which it carried along with it. For on the one hand, the Austerity of their Lives added Weight and Credit to their Revelari∣ons; and on the other hand, their Revelations caused their Discipline to be embraced. Several good Men were immediately brought into the Snare, and in a short time we find the Churches of Phrygia, and afterwards other Churches divided upon the Account of these new Prophesies. Even the Bishop of Rome himself was imposed upon by them, and granted them Communicatory Letters, which he presently Revoked, being sensible of his Error. The Christians of the Church of France were more circumspect as to this Matter, and wrote to Pope Victor and the Churches of Asia concerning these new Prophesies, giving such a Judgment of them as was very discreet and agreeable to the Faith; as Eusebius tells us: But we do not certainly know what it was that they wrote, though it is very like∣ly that they disapproved of these new Revelations, wishing nevertheless, that they would treat with Gentleness and Moderation, those who had suffered themselves to be surprized by Error, that so they might be induced to return into the Bosom of the Church. At length the Bishops of Asia having met together several times, to examine these new Prophesies, considering of what Consequence it was to put a Stop to their farther Progress, Condemned them, and Excommunicated as well those who were the Authors of them, as those that followed them. And this is all that I thought necessa∣ry to say concerning the Sect of the Montanists, and the Condition in which it was in Tertullian's time. We will now return to our Author, and speak of his Genius, his Style, and the Judg∣ment that ought to be passed upon his Writings.

He was of a very quick, sprightly, and sharp Temper, but he had not all that Exactness and Clearness that might have been wished. There is very often more Glittering then Solidity in his Rea∣sonings: He rather strikes and dazles by his bold Expressions, than convinces by the Force of his Arguments. His Thoughts are far fetch'd, and sometimes lofty enough; the Turn which he gives them is high, but not very natural. He oftentimes stretches things too far. He is warm, and transported al∣most upon every thing. He is full of Figures and Hyperboles. He was very well furnished with Know∣ledge and Learning, which he sufficiently knew how to make use of to good purpose. His Excellency consisted in Satyr, his Jests are very ingenious and biting. He attack'd his Adversaries very cunningly, and overthrew them by a multitude of Reasons; which are interwoven, and, as it were, linked one within another. Lastly, If he does not persuade by his Reasonings, he at least forces Consent by that pompous way of Expression whereby he sets them out. His Style is Concise, his Expressions Em∣phatical, and there are in his Writings almost as many Sentences as Words. Yet Lactantius had rea∣son to take notice of three considerable Defects in him.

Tertullian, says he, was very well vers'd in the fine Learning, but his Style is neither fluent nor polite, but very obscure.

In loquendo parum facilis, parum comtus, & multum obscurus. These three Faults in Style are common to him, with the greatest part of the African Writers kk 1.36 but we may say, that they are in a very high Degree in Tertullian, and that there is not any Writer, whose Style is more harsh, less polite, and more obscure than his. All his Works are subject to these Defects, some more, and some less. He is more clear and concise in his Polemical Discourses, more obscure and harder in his common Places; as in the Book De Pallio, which is one of the obscurest Pieces of Antiquity. His Book of Pennance is the most Polite of all. The most excellent, and the usefullest of his Works, are, his Apology, the Praescriptions. his Books of Pennance, of Baptism, of Prayer, and his Exhortations to Patience, and to Martyrdom.

After what we have said already, it is an easie matter to judge the true Character of Tertullian; But it is not so easie to determine, whether he be more to be commended, or Blamed: For first of all, if we were to make a Judgment, in relation to the Service which he did the Church, it would be diffi∣cult to say, whether he has done more Hurt or Good. For on the one hand, he vigorously defended its Doctrine against several Hereticks, he maintained in some of his Works very considerable Points

relating to Discipline; and la••tly, he all along Established an e••cellent Morality: Buton the other hand, besides that he always had several Errors, he formerly opposed the Discipline of the Church af∣ter he separated from it. And if we judge in the second Place by the Temper of the Man, there is so much of Good and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in it, that we cannot tell which of the two ought to carry it. Lastly, If we make a Judgment of him by his Style, we cannot tell whether he is to be Commended for what he has that is Great and Surprizing, or to be Blamed, because of its other Defects and Imperfections. And thus Learned Men have always been, and are still extreamly divided ll 1.37 in the Judgments which

they have given, and which they still give of this Author; which makes me believe, that it is better to commend the Good, and to blame what is amiss, than to pretend to make an absolute Judgment, which would be always subject to a thousand Disputes.

In the last place, to speak briefly of the Editions of Tertullian, there has hardly been any Author of•…•…er Printed, and upon whom more Persons have bestowed their Pains. For which, two Reasons may be given, the Corruption of the Manuscripts, and his Obscurity, and these two Reasons are like∣wise the cause one of the other; for his Obscurity induced the Transcribers, who did not understand him, to alter some Words, that they might make such a Sense as they themselves understood: And the Corruptions of these Transcribers have been so far from clearing his Meaning, that they have rendered it still more Obscure; Which has been the occasion that this Author has given so much Trouble to all those that have hitherto set out any Editions of any part of his Works.

Rhenanus was the first who published Tertullian's Works, which were first Printed at Basil in the year 1521. from two Manuscripts which he had got out of two Abbeys in Germany; and the second time in the year 1528. I have a great Esteem for the Arguments and Notes, which this excellent Person, who was very well vers'd in all Parts of Learning, and in Ecclesiastical Antiquity, has put at the beginning of the greatest part of Tertullian's Works: And I think that no Man has laboured more successfully than he in the Explication of this Author; and that Rigaltius has very well observed, that Rhenanus wanted nothing to have made his Work compleat, but more Manuscripts. Yet his Notes have been Censured by the Spanish Inquisition, and they have been put at Rome in the Index Expurga∣torius, because of some Remarks which were a little too free upon the Abuses that were common in his time: But this ought not to diminish the Esteem we ought to have for him. We likewise find Edi∣tions of Tertullian, printed at Basil in the years 1525, 1536, 1539. But they are plainly Copies of the first Edition, wherein nothing is altered but the year. The third Edition of Rhenanus is the best, it was Printed at Basil in Folio in the year 1550. In this Edition, there are some Books corrected by Gelenius out of a Manuscript from England. The fourth was likewise Printed at Basil in 1562. The fifth is of Paris, Printed by Guillard in 1545. The sixth was Printed upon a very curious Letter in the year 1566, Printed at Paris in two Volumes in Octavo, for Volchelus, and Audoenus Parvus. Lau∣rentius de la Barre set forth a new Edition of Tertullian, Printed at Paris in 1580. Then Pamelius Published Tertullian with new Commentaries: His first Edition was in the year 1579, Printed at Ant∣werp. It was followed afterwards by that of 1583, Printed at Paris for Sonnius; and it was after∣wards Printed at Antwerp by Plantin in 1584; at Heydelberg for Commelin in 1596, and 1599; at Cologne in 1617; at Geneva in 1597, 1601, 1607; at Zurich by Belley in 1657; at Paris in 1608, in 1616, in 1634, in 1658, in 1664; and at Roan in 1662. The Commentaries of this Author are both Learned and Useful, but he digresses too much from his Subject, and he often brings in things, which are of no use for the understanding of his Author. Tertullian's Works have been likewise Printed according to Pamelius's Edition with Jimius's Notes, at Franeker in 1597. In the year 1627, Rigal∣tius Printed nine Treatises of Tertullian at Paris in Octavo, more Correct, from a Manuscript pre∣sented by Agobardus, who lived in the Ninth Century, to the Church of Lions, whereof he was Bishop, and he collated it with the various Readings of a Manuscript of Mousieur Montchal. In 1584, Latinus Latinius published his Conjectures to restore some Places of Tertullian, which he pretended were cor∣rupted. Pancirollus also had taken pains upon Tertullian, but he published nothing. Fulvius Ursinus Collected several various Readings from Manuscripts, and put them in the Margin of one of Pamelius's Editions of Tertullian which Rigaltius used. Johannes Woërus has likewise made some Notes upon Tertullian, as well as Albaspinaeus, who wrote several upon some Passages relating to Discipline and Penance. Pithaeus, Mercerus, Junius, Salmasius, Richerius, Theodorus Marsilius, and some others, have made Remarks upon his Book De Pallio, Printed separately at Paris in 1576, and 1594, with Junius's Notes; In 1600, with those of Salmasius; In 1625, Jacobus Gothofredus published from the Manuscript of Agobardus the two Books to the Nations, which were never Printed before. They were Printed at Geneva for Choiiet, together with the Commentaries of that Learned Lawyer.

La Cerda the Jesuit undertook to make a Continued Commentary upon Tertullian's Works, more ample than those which had been hitherto made: He began this Work, and caused two Volumes of it to be Printed at Paris in 1624, in 1630, and 1641; but he never finished it, and his Commentaries are only upon part of Tertullian's Books; and besides they are long and tedious, because he explains several things which need no Explication, and he very often leaves his Subject.

After all these, the Learned Rigaltius having Revised Tertullian's Works from the Manuscript of Agoba••dus, and making use of the various Readings Collected by Ursinus, Pithaeus, and Junius, pub∣lished the Text of Tertullian more Correct in very many places, and added some short Notes, to exa∣mine which of the two Readings is the truest, to reject or confirm some Conjectures, and to explain the most Difficult and Uncommon Words; And he has annexed at the end longer Observations, to explain the difficult Passages, or to clear some ancient Practi••es; or lastly, to discover some Point of Learning which was more difficult to be cleared.

Where, if, says he, you find any Opinions that are a little too free, as about the Confession of Secret Sins, about the Face of Jesus, (which he believes was not at all Comely, grounding it upon the Testimony of Tertullian, and some others of the An∣cients) and upon the Wax-Tapers which are lighted up in the Churches in the Day-time, you must not think that I have taken notice of them any otherwise, than as they were necessary to explain Tertullian's Notions, and not any ways to reprehend the Doctrine of the Catholick Church, or to disapprove of the Opinions of those Fathers, who lived after his time.

Words by which Rigaltius endeavours to excuse those Opinions, which were too freely inserted sometimes by him in his Notes,

as well upon St. Cyprian as Tertullian; But I do not know whether this Excuse will satisfie every Body, for it must be confessed, that there are some places, wherein he sufficiently shews, that he speaks ac∣cording to his own Opinion, rather than according to that of his Author, and in which he even digresses from his Subject, to make Observations which are sometimes not very agreeable to the present Pra∣ctice of the Church: But though we might have some reason to tax some of his Notes as to what re∣lates to Divinity; yet we must confess on the other side, that the Notes and Remarks which he has made relating to Criticism, Grammar, and the Explication of some difficult Passages of Tertullian, are very excellent. However he is generally blamed for being too bold in his Conjectures, and that he has not been exact enough in Revising his Author from ancient Manuscripts; And lastly, that he has inser∣ted his Conjectures, and other Mens into the Text, without the Authority of any Manuscripts.

The Bookseller, who Printed the Tertullian of Rigaltius in 1634, being willing to make the Work as Compleat as he could, Printed in 1635, in a Volume by it self, the Notes and Commentaries of those who had taken Pains upon Tertullian before him, that so we might have all that had been done upon this Author, excepting the Commentaries of La Cerda. This Volume joyned to the Edition of Rigaltius's Tertullian of 1634, which was afterwards Reprinted in 1641, is the perfectest Edition of this Author.

It has been since Printed in 1664, which is not so large, but more Commodious, wherein they have put in the Margin the entire Notes and Observations of Rigaltius, together with others selected from those of Rhenanus, Pamelius, Albaspinaeus, La Cerda, and Salmasius, &c. together with the Corrections of Mercerus. Priorius, who had the Care of this Edition, has put at the beginning a Preface, which he calls, A Discourse concerning the Life and Errors of Tertullian, that is not exactly done, any more than this Authors Notes; which have not found a General Esteem among the Learned.

I do not speak of the Edition of Tertullian published by Father George, which he caused to be Printed at Paris in 1648, and 1650, in three great Volumes, which he has Entituled Tertullianus Redivivu••, because there is nothing in this Edition worth taking notice of; and those long and tedious Com∣mentaries which this Capuchin has made, can be of no advantage to the Ignorant, nor of any use to the Learned.

It would be a desirable thing to have a new Edition of Tertullian Printed, the Text whereof should be exactly agreeable to the best Manuscripts, without inserting the Conjectures of particular Persons. And they ought likewise to add a Choice Collection of those Notes which are the most useful, taken from all the Commentators; And lastly, they should not range the Books according to the Order of Time, but according to the Order of the Matters, as we have done in giving an Abridgment of the Books, and to prefix at the beginning, The Life of Tertullian, and a Criticism upon his Writings; like that which we have done here in French, but larger, and more exact.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Tertullian.] He was called Q. Septimius Florens Tertullianus, which distinguishes him from the Con∣sul Tertullus and Tertullian the Martyr.
• b 1.2

  And of the City of Carthage.] He testifies as much himself in his Book De Pallio, c. 2. and in his Apology, c. 9. Witness, says he, the Troops of our Coun∣try, speaking of the Troops under the Proconsul of Carthage. S. Jerom confirms the same in his Chroni∣con, and in his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers.
• * 1.3

  Tertullian.
• c 1.4

  And says, that his Father was a Centurion of these Troops, which was no very considerable Employment.] Eusebius seems to say, that Tertullian was a Roman, and a Person of Quality. Hist. l. 2. c. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. What he says of Tertullian's being well skilled in the Roman Laws, has made some believe, that he was a Lawyer, and indeed there is a Lawyer of the same Name: But it is certain, that he is a different Person from our Tertullian, and Eusebius does not say, that he was a Lawyer, but that he was well versed in the Roman Laws. What Eusebius adds of his Country and his Extraction, is by no means to be maintained, if we do not understand it of the Roman Writers; and that the Sense must be, that Tertullian was one of the most Excellent of all the Latin Authors. Ruffinus has given this Sense to this Passage of Eusebius by translating it, Inter nostros Scriptores admodum clarus. Pamelius says, that Tertullian was a Lawyer, but he brings no good Argument for it, relying only upon the Authority of Trithemius, who is a modern Author.
• d 1.5

  But that he was at first a Heathen.] He himself says, speaking to the Heathens in his Apology, We have been likewise of your Party; Men are not born Chri∣stians, but they become so. And in his Book De Specta∣culis, and in that concerning the Resurrection of the Flesh, chap. 19. and 59. he says, That he had assisted at those Sights and Spectacles, and that he had spent part of his Life in Lewdness.
• e 1.6

  But it is not known when, nor upon what occasion he was converted to the Church.] Pamelius says, that he was converted by the Answer of an Oracle, and Fa∣ther George of Amiens affirms, that it was by a Vi∣sion, but neither of these are to be credited.
• f 1.7

  And Antoninus Caracalla.] S. Jerom affirms, that he flourished under these Emperors, and this appears by his Writings; some have said, that he flourished about the year 160, but they are mistaken.
• g 1.8

  To an extream old Age.] S. Jerom, in his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers, says, Usque ad Decrepitam aetatem vixisse fertur.
• h 1.9

  That he was not Married till after he was Baptized.] His Wife was a Christian; and he does not say in any place of his Works, that she was converted with him, or that she had converted him; it is therefore more probable, that he Married her after he was a Christian. For there is no likelihood, that while he was a Heathen, he should Marry a Christian Wo∣man; and if she had been converted with him, or that she had converted him, he would without doubt have taken some notice of it in the Books which he wrote to her. [His urging S. Paul's Authority and Command in his second Book to his Wife, when he advises her to marry a Christian if ever she married again, is a strong presumption, that if he married after his Conversion, his Wife was a Christian at that time.]
• i 1.10

  Till he was pretty well advanced in Years.] These Books are composed in the form of a Last Will or Testament; In the first, he exhorts his Wife to pre∣serve her Continency after his Death; a sign that she had but little regard of it in his Life time. In the second, he tells her plainly, that it is a Duty to endeavour to maintain that Continency in their Wi∣dowhood, which they could not preserve in their Married Estate: Which shews, that Pamelius's Opi∣nion is nothing but a groundless Supposition. These Books were written by Tertullian towards the end of his Life, as may be proved. First, by the manner of the Composition, which is in form of a Last Will or Testament. Secondly, because a Man seldom troubles himself to write to his Wife, what would he have her do after his Death, but till he is in years. Thirdly, because though Tertullian was not a thorough-paced Montanist when he wrote those two Books, yet he seems to be leaning very much that way.
• * 1.10.1

  [That is not a ne∣cessary Conse∣quence.]
• k 1.11

  There is no Passage in his Writings from whence it can be concluded, that he was a Priest of the Catholick Church.] There is a Place in his Book De Animâ, c. 9. whence it may be concluded, that he preached in the Church of the Montanists, and that they related to him strange Visions. But as all the Montanists talked after this rate in their Assemblies, it cannot certain∣ly be concluded from hence, that he was a Priest; and we have only the Authority of S. Jerom for it.
• l 1.12

  But S. Jerom affirms it so positively.] In his Trea∣tise of Ecclesiastical Writers, Cum usque ad mediam aetatem Presbyter Ecclesiae permansisset, ad Montani Dog∣ma delapsus est.
• m 1.13

  It is commonly believed, that he was a Priest of the Church of Rome.] That which makes it believed that he was a Roman Priest, is what S. Jerom says of his falling into the Error of the Montanists, because he was provoked by Envy, and the Injuries which he received from the Clergy of that Church. But there is no necessity for all this that he should be at Rome, since there was a sufficient Intimacy and Correspon∣dence between these two Churches, so that it might be easily known at Rome, what was said and done at Carthage, and though he had been then at Rome, yet it would not have followed, that he was Priest of that Church: None of the Ancients affirm it, but on the contrary, Optatus calls him a Carthaginian, as he calls Zephirinus Urbicus, that is, the Bishop of Rome: And also Victorinus Patavionensis. The Prae∣destinatus of Sirmondus calls him plainly, a Presbyter of Carthage.
• n 1.14

  In the beginning of the Third Century.] The Epo∣cha of his Change is certain, for we may easily fix it, because he says in his Book against Praxeas, that this Heretick being come to Rome, hindred the Bishop of that Church from acknowledging the Prophecies of Montanus, that he wrote against him at that time, and had obliged him to revoke his Opinion, that af∣terwards he acknowledged the Paraclet, or Com∣forter. Now it is very likely, that Victor was this Bishop that rejected the Prophecies of Montanus; For Tertullian says, that Praxeas hindred him from con∣senting to these new Prophesies, by urging the Au∣thority of his Predecessors, who could be no other than the Popes Anicetus and Eleutherus, in whose time these new Prophecies of Montanus first began to ap∣pear: So that Tertullian could not be turned till after the Pontificate of Victo; who was Pope from the Year 193, to the Year 201. He was a Montanist when he composed the Books against Marcion, which were written in the Year 207. So that Pamelius, who fixes his Change in the Year 210, is mistaken.
• o 1.15

  Have given different Causes thereof.] Baronius is the Author of the first Opinion, ad An. 201, n. 9. Pamelius, in his Life of Tertullian, of the second. And there are others besides, who have assigned other Causes for his Change, which are all groundless.
• p 1.16

  His Book of the Apology for the Christian Religion was written about the Year 200, from the Birth of Christ.] It is very likely that it was Composed about this time. M. Allix pretends, that it was not written till the Year 211, but his Reasons are but weak. He says, that he alludes in the 47th Chapter to the Book of Praescriptions; but though he here makes use of the term Praescribe, it does not thence follow, that this Book was Composed after that of the Praescriptions. The second Reason is taken from an Eclipse seen at Utica, in the Year 210, to which, says he, Tertullian alludes in the 20th Chapter; but he does not speak at all in this place of any particular Eclipse. The last and principal Reason of M. Allix, is that in the 4th Chapter of the Apology, he speaks of Severus as if he were dead. Severus, says he, A Prince of great Constancy; has he not lately abolish'd by his Authority the Papian Law; which ordains, that one should have Children before the Age in which the Julian Law gives permission to Marry. But this might be said of Severus whilst he was yet living, and it is likely that he abolished this Law (if yet he did abolish it at all, for it was rather Constantine that did it,) in the beginning of his Reign. But what we read in the 5th Chapter, Who are those that have made Laws against the Chri∣stians, 'tis neither Adrian, nor Vespasian, nor Antoni∣nus, nor Severus, might prove that he wrote after the Death of Severus, but we must read Verus, as it is in the later Editions, and not Severus.
• q 1.17

  It is more probable that it was composed in Africa.] Pamelius and several Authors are of Opinion, that he wrote his Apology at Rome, and that he addressed it to the Senate. But there is not one Passage in this Book, that gives any ground for this Conjecture. On the contrary, this Book is Addressed to the Chief Go∣vernours of the Cities. Tertullian speaks of Rome and the Romans, as not being in their City, nor with them. In Chap. 21, 24, 35, and 45. he speaks of the Proconsul, and there was not any at Rome. As to what we say, that it was not Addressed to the Senate, but to the Governors of the Provinces, the beginning of the Apology does evidently shew: Which is this. Si non licet vobis Romani Imperii Antistites, in aperto & in ipso vertice civitatis Praesidentibus ad judicandum pa∣lam dispicere, & coram Examinare quid sit liquidum causa Christianorum, si ad hanc solam speciem Auctoritas vestra de Justitiae Diligentiâ in publico aut timet, aut erubescit inquirere. Si denique domesticis indiciis nimis onerata sectae hujus infestatio obruit viam defensioni, &c. Those which he calls Imperii Antistites are the Gover∣nors and Proconsuls, and that which follows plainly shews it, for he says, that they preside in vertice civi∣tatis, which does not signifie the City of Rome, which is always called Urbs, and what he adds, that it be∣longs to them to examine the Cause of the Chri∣stians, to try them, and to receive Informations against them, does evidently prove, that he speaks of the Governors of Places. Secondly, he does not mention so much as one word of the Senate in the whole Book. Thirdly, he speaks of the Proconsul, as of the Supream Magistrate, Chap. 45. Lastly, he always calls those to whom he Addresses this Work Praesides, a Title which properly agrees to the Gover∣nors of the Provinces.
• r 1.18

  The Discourses concerning publick Sights and Specta∣cles, and of Idolatry.] In the 5th Chapter of the Book concerning Idolatry, he alludes to the Joy at the Birth of Geta; He speaks in his Book concerning Publick Sights and Spectacles, Chap. 7. of the City of Rome, like a Person who was not there, so that this Book could not be made at Rome as has been believed.
• s 1.19

  His Books of the Ornament and Dresses of Women.] The Latin Titles are, De cultu Muliebri, & de habitu Muliebri.
• t 1.20

  His Book of the Testimony of the Soul has no certain Epocha.] It was written after his Apology, as may be concluded from the 5th Chapter.
• v 1.21

  His Books against Marcion are the first of this last sort.] It is evident that he was a Montanist, when he Composed the Books against Marcion; this appears by the 28th Chapter of his First Book, by the 24th of the Third Book, by the 22d of the Fourth Book, and by the 15th of the Fifth Book. In the Fourth Book, Ch. 22. he calls the Catholicks Psychici.
• x 1.22

  He promises his Book of Praescriptions.] Lib. 1. cap. 1. Alius libellus hunc gradum sustinebit adversus Haereticos, etiam sine tractatu Doctrinarum revincendos, quod hoc sit de Praescriptione novitatis; We may affirm, that it was written before, and that he only publish'd it then, that he might confirm some Arguments in his Books against Marcion. Which has given occa∣sion to some, to think that this Book was written by Tertullian, whilst he was yet Orthodox, because he speaks so advantageously for the Church against No∣velties. But he makes use of the very same Princi∣ples, in his Book against Marcion, and against Praxeas. The Catalogue of the Hereticks, where he puts the Montanists in the Number of Hereticks, is not Tertul∣lian's; so that Reason, which might contribute to make it believed, that he wrote his Praescriptions whilst he was a Catholick, is of no consequence.
• y 1.23

  The Book entituled Scorpiacus.] This Book of Scorpiacus was written after the Books against Mar∣cion, as may be seen by the 5th Chapter.
• z 1.24

  The Book De Coronâ.] It was written upon oc∣casion of a Donative granted by the Emperors Anto∣ninus Caracalla, and Severus, to the Soldiers, about the Year 209.
• aa 1.25

  The Book De Pallio.] Scaliger pretends that this was his first Work; and Salmasius on the contrary says, that it was written when he was made Priest. The first believes, that the Cloak was a Habit for all Christians. And the second maintains, that it was only a Habit for the Priests; but both of them are mistaken, for the Christians and Priests wore both long and short Garments indifferently, according to the Customs of the Places where they were. The Cloak was a Habit for Philosophers, and such as made Profession of a more austere Life than ordi∣nary. What is said in the second Chapter of his Book De Pallio, that the triple Virtue of the Empe∣ror had entirely routed the Barbarians, and procu∣red Peace and Tranquility to the People, can no otherwise be understood, but of the latter end of the Reign of Severus, who enjoyed a most profound Peace after he had defeated all his Enemies, and taken in as Partners in the Governments, his two Sons Caracalla and Geta, and this is what Tertullian calls Triplex Imperii Virtus, as when he says, Barbari exclusi, he alludes to the Wall which Severus caused to be built in Britain, to put a stop to the Incursions of the Barbarians.
• bb 1.26

  What is said concerning the State of the Roman Empire, in the Seventh Chapter.] He ascribes in this place the flourishing Condition of the Empire, the Germans beaten back, the Britains hemmed in and secured, the Moors besieged by the Roman Legi∣ons, &c. Which agrees to the time of the Empe∣ror Severus, though this cannot be understood, but of the latter end of his Reign, when after he had Conquered all the Barbarians, he caused that Wall to be built, which we just now mentioned, and dispersed the Roman Legions about the Frontiers of the Empire, as Dion Cassius observes.
• cc 1.27

  We do not certainly know the time when these Books were written against Praxeas, &c.] It is evident, that the Book against Praxeas was Composed after he was a Montanist, supra. In his Book against Hermogenes, he accuses this Heretick of pretending to be Mar∣ried, &c. which is a Reproach exactly agreeable to the temper of the Montanists; And in the Book against the Valentinians, he commends Proclus or Pro∣culus a famous Montanist. This Book was written after his Book against Hermogenes, for he observes there, that he had already written against this He∣retick.
• dd 1.28

  About the Year 213.] Severus, says he, the Fa∣ther of Antoninus, had some regard for the Chri∣stians.
• ee 1.29

  The two Books to the Nations composed about the same time.] In the First Book, Chap. 17. he alludes to the Titles of Antoninus Caracalla, who caused himself to be called Parthicus and Germanicus; and in the same place, Chap. 9. he says, That there was not yet elapsed 300 Years from the Death of Jesus Christ to his own time, which shews, that the Third Age was then already advanced. Besides, that these Books were written since his Apology, which is the Subject of this, and which he here enlarges, and polishes, and puts into order in these two Books, wherein we may find several Phrases and Expressions taken from the Books which he wrote after he was a Montanist.
• ff 1.30

  Which Gennadius Bishop of Marseilles attributes to Salvian.] In Catalog. cap. 67. In morem Graecorum de principio Genesis usque ad conditionem hominis composuit versu Hexametro. This is true of that Poem ascribed to Tertullian.
• gg 1.31

  Perhaps that which was composed by Verecundus.] Isidore de Viris illustribus, cap. 7. Verecundus Africanus Episcopus studiis liberalium Literarum disertus edidit carmine dactylo, duos modicos, brevesque libellos, quorum primum de resurrectione, & judicio scripsit, alterum de paenitentia. The Poem concerning Judgment is also concerning the Resurrection. Garcias says, that he had seen the Poem concerning Pennnce, and he re∣peats the first Verse of it, which is written after the same manner as the beginning of this Poem con∣cerning Judgment; but yet there are some Passages, which seem to come from a later Author than Vere∣cundus, who, as it is believed, lived in the Fifth Century.
• hh 1.32

  In the Poem against Marcion.] Tertullian, in his Book De Animâ, chap. 57. says, that it was not the Soul of Samuel, but only a Phantasm, which the Witch raised up; and the Author of the Poem in his third Book supposes, that it was Samuel himself that was raised, to acquaint Saul what was to befall him. Tertullian, in his Book of Praescriptions, makes S. Clemens to succeed S. Peter; but this Author places him the Fourth, making two Popes of Cletus and Anacletus.
• * 1.33

  This must be owned to have been a great piece of Ingenuity in a Doctor of Sorbon, when the Per∣secution of the Hugonors was at the height in France.
• ii 1.34

  He expresses himself after such a manner as is not very agreeable to that which has been made use of in the following Ages.] He says first, that the WORD was begotten of the Father, when God created the World; but he acknowledges at the same time, that he was in God, and a Person distinct from the Father from all Eternity. And so the whole Ambi∣guity lies in the Term Generation, which he does not understand of the Eternal Procession of the Son, but of a certain Prolation or Emission without, which he supposes was done at the Instant of the Creation of the World, because it is by the WORD that God Created it, and doth still govern it. And this ap∣pears evidently in Tertullian's Book, and we ought not to wonder, if in his Book against Hermogenes, he says, that there was a certain time, when the Father was not the Father, and when he began to be the Son, because he believed that he had not the Quality and Name of Son, 'till this World was Created, though he was in God before, and distinguished from the Father from all Eternity. Secondly, he says, that the Father is invisible, and the Son visible; but in that Sense which we have explained, that is to say, that the Son, who has always rendred himself visible to Men, by taking several Forms, under which he has appeared to them; and lastly, by making him∣self Man. Thirdly, He seems in some Places to ••••∣sinuate, that even the WORD, as it is the WORD is inferior to the Father; but this must be under∣stood of an Inferiority, which the Divines call of O∣riginal, that is to say, (as he explains it himself) be∣cause he has received all from the Father, for he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 expresly in several places, that the Father and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Son are of one, and the same Substance. Fourthly, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sometimes makes use of the Word Substance, to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Person Subsisting, which is an usual thing amo•…•… the Ancients before the Council of Nice, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 amongst some of them after it.
• * 1.35

  This is also ingenuously taken notice of, because the Church of Rome allows Women to Baptize in Case of Necessity.
• kk 1.36

  These three Faults in Style are indeed to be found in the greatest part of the African Writers.] We must ex∣cept Minutius, S. Cyprian and Lactantius, they had quite worn off that way of Writing, though S. Cy∣prian still retains some relish of it.
• ll 1.37

  And thus Learned Men have always been, and are still extreamly divided.] We shall here set down some Judgments made by the Ancients and Moderns con∣cerning Tertullian: S. Cypri••n, by the Relation of S. Jer••m, who was told it by a Priest that had heard it from a Secretary of S. Cyprian's, used every day to read something of his Works; and when he called for his Book, he said, Give me my Master. And in truth S. Cyprian has imitated him, and has borrow∣ed a great many things from him. He has likewise composed the greatest part of his Works with the same design as Tertullian, as his Book of Idolatry, in imitation of Tertullian's Apology. His Books De Disci∣plina & habit•• ••uliebri, de zelo & liv••re, de Oratione Dominica, de opere & el•…•…synis, were written in imitation of those of Tert••llian upon the same Sub∣ject. Eusebius says of Tertullian, that he was one of the ablest of the Latin Writers, and that he has ob∣tained a great Reputation in all the Churches.

  L••ctantius passes the Judgment which we have al∣ready related, which is not very advantageous to him. S. Hilary says in his Commentary upon S. Mat∣thew, that the Error into which he fell, has taken away the Authority of his Books, which deserved Approbation. C••nsequens error hominis detraxit scrip∣tis probabilibus Authoritatem.

  S. Jerom speaks sometimes very advantageously of him, as in his Catalogue, where he calls him a Man of a quick and sharp Wit; and in his Epistle to Magnu••, he says that there was not any Author, who had more Learning and Subtilty; but in other pla∣ces he reprehends his Errors and Defects. In his A∣pology against ••uff••••us, he says, I commend his Wit, but condemn his Heresies; and in his Book against Hel∣vidius- who opposed to him Tertullian's Authority, he makes this Answer, What I have to say to you con∣cerning Tertullian, is, that he is not of the Church. Ecclesiae hominem non esse.

  S. Austin commends Tertullian's Style, and always condemns his Error; in his Book De Genesi at Lite∣ram, he says, that Tertullian having an excellent Ap∣prehension, did sometime discover the Truth, and that he could not forbear sometimes to establish it e∣ven against his own Opinions.

  Vincentius Lirinensis gives a Character of Tertullian in these Words; Tertullian, says he, was among the Latins what Origen was among the Greeks, that is to say, the first and the most considerable Man they had. In word, Is there any Author more knowing and better versed, both in Ecclesiastical and Prophane Learning? Has he not comprized in his vast and pr••digious Memory; all the Philosophy of the S••ges, the Maxims of the dif∣ferent Sects, with their Histories, and what else app••••tained to them? Did he ever undertake to attack any thing, which he has not almost always, either pierced by the Vivaci∣ty of his Wit, or overthrown by the Force and Weight of his Reasonings? And who can sufficiently ext••l the Beau∣ties of his Discourse, which is so well guarded, and ••inked together by a continual C••nin of Argum••nts, that he even forces the Cons••nt of those whom he cannot per∣suade? His Words are as so many Sentences. His An∣swers are almost so many Victories, as has been suffici∣ently experienced by the Marcions, the Apelles's, the Pra••eas's, the Hermogenes's, the Jews, the Gentiles, the Gnosticks, and a great many others, whose Blasphe∣mies he has silenced by great numbers of Books that have ••een as somany Thunderbolts which have reduced them to Ashes. And yet though ••e has had all these Advantages, he did not continue in the Ancient and Universal Faith of the Church, and he has proved himself less faithful than El•…•…t. At last he altered his Judgment, and his Er∣ror, as has been observed by that blessed C••••fess••r S. Hil••∣ry, by which means he has taken away that Authority fr•••• his Writings, which otherwise they would have deserved.

  I shall take no notice of the Judgment of Trithem••∣us, Rhenanus, Politian, Pa••elius, Rigaltius, and some other Moderns, which every body may consult upon occasion, and I shall conclude with the Judgments given by two of our French Authors, who have both given us Characters of Tertullian, but in a diffe∣rent way.

  The first is the famous M. Balsac, in a Letter written to Rigaltius, which is the Second of the Fifth Book.

  I expect (says he) the Tertullian whic•• you are publishing, that he may learn me that Pa∣tience, for which he gives such admirable Instru∣ctions; He is an Author to whom your Preface would have reconciled me, if I had had an Aversi∣on for him, and if the Harshness of his Expressions, and the Vices of his Age had dissuaded me from reading him; but I have had an Esteem for him for a long time, and as hard and crabbed as he is, yet he is not at all unpleasant to me. I have found in his Writings, that Black Light which is mention∣ed in one of the ancient Poets, and I look upon his Obscurity with the same Pleasure, as that of Ebony which is very bright, and neatly wrought. This has always been my Opinion; for as the Beauties of Africa are not less amiable, though they are not like ours, and as S••ph••••isba has eclipsed several Italian Ladies, so the Wits of that Country are not less pleasing with this foreign sort of Eloquence▪ and I shall prefer him before a great many affected Imitators of Cicer••; And though we should grant to the nicest Criticks, that his Style is of Iron, yet they must likewise own to us, that out of this Iron he has forged most excellent Weapons; and that he has defended the Honour and Innocence of Christi∣anity; that he has quite routed the Valentinians, and struck Marcion to the very Heart.

  The second Character of Tertullian, is that which Father M••llebranche gives us in his Search after Truth, in his Se∣cond Book, Chap. 3.

  Tertullian (says he) wa•• without doubt a Man of extraordinary Learning, but he had more Memory than Judgment. He excelled more in his Fancy and Imagination, than in Judgment and true extent of Thought. Ther•• is no doubt to be made, but that at last he was an Enthusiast, in that sense which I have explained it, and that he had almost all the Qualities which I have attributed to these Fanaticks. That Respect which he had for the Visions of Montanus, and for his Prophetesses, is an unquestionable Proof of th•• Weakness of his Judgment. That Fire, those Heats, those Enthusiasms upon little Subjects, do evi∣dently discover the Extravagancy of his Fancy: How many Irregular Transports are there in his Hyperboles and Figures? How many Pompous and Magnificent Reasons, which prove only by their glittering, and which persuade only by stunning and dazling of the Understanding!

  He afterwards endeavours to shew that this is a true Picture, by making some Excerptions out of his Book De Palli••, which he thinks to be the most proper ••ook to justi∣fie what he affirm••.
• * 1.38

  Recherche 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to Verité.