• Accueil
  • Œuvres
  • Introduction Instructions Collaboration Sponsors / Collaborateurs Copyrights Contact Mentions légales
Bibliothek der Kirchenväter
Recherche
DE EN FR
Œuvres Tertullien (160-220) De carne Christi

Edition Masquer
De carne Christi

XI

[1] Sed aliam argumentationem eorum convenimus, exigentes cur animalem carnem subeundo Christus animam carnalem videatur habuisse. 'Deus enim inquiunt gestivit animam visibilem hominibus exhibere faciendo eam corpus quae retro invisibilis extiterit, natura nihil sed nec semetipsam videns prae impedimento carnis huius, ut etiam disceptaretur nata sit anima an non, mortalis an non: itaque animam corpus effectam in Christo ut eam nascentem et morientem et, quod sit amplius, resurgentem videremus.' [2] et hoc autem quale erit, ut per carnem demonstraretur anima sibi aut nobis, quae per carnem non poterat agnosci, ut sic ostenderetur dum id fit cui latebat, id est caro? tenebras videlicet accepit ut lucere possit. denique ad hoc prius retractemus an isto modo ostendenda fuerit anima, dehinc an in totum invisibilem eam retro allegent, utrum quasi incorporalem an etiam habentem aliquod genus corporis proprii. [3] et tamen cum invisibilem dicant corporalem constituunt, habentem quod invisibile sit: nihil enim habens invisibile quomodo potest invisibilis dici? sed nec esse quidem potest, nihil habens per quod sit: cum autem sit, habeat necesse est aliquid per quod est. [4] si habet aliquid per quod est, hoc erit corpus eius. omne quod est corpus est sui generis: nihil est incorporale nisi quod non est. habente igitur anima invisibile corpus, qui visibilem eam facere susceperat utique dignius id eius visibile fecisset quod invisibile habebatur, quia nec hic mendacium aut infirmitas deo competit, mendacium si aliud animam quam quod erat demonstravit, infirmitas si id quod erat demonstrare non valuit. [5] nemo ostendere volens hominem cassidem aut personam ei inducit: hoc autem factum est animae si in carne conversa alienam induit superficiem. sed et si incorporalis anima deputetur, ut aliqua vi rationis occulta sit quidem anima, corpus tamen non sit quicquid est anima, proinde et impossibile deo non erat, et proposito eius congruentius competebat, nova aliqua corporis specie eam demonstrare quam ista communi omnium, alterius iam notitiae, ne sine causa visibilem ex invisibili facere gestisset animam, istis scilicet quaestionibus opportunam per carnis in illam humanae defensionem. [6] 'Sed non poterat Christus inter homines nisi homo videri.' redde igitur Christo fidem suam, ut qui homo voluit incedere animam quoque humanae condicionis ostenderit, non faciens eam carneam sed induens eam carne.

Traduction Masquer
On the Flesh of Christ

Chapter XI.--The Opposite Extravagance Exposed. That is Christ with a Soul Composed of Flesh--Corporeal, Though Invisible. Christ's Soul, Like Ours, Distinct from Flesh, Though Clothed in It.

But we meet another argument of theirs, when we raise the question why Christ, in assuming a flesh composed of soul, should seem to have had a soul that was made of flesh? For God, they say, desired to make the soul visible to men, by enduing it with a bodily nature, although it was before invisible; of its own nature, indeed, it was incapable of seeing anything, even its own self, by reason of the obstacle of this flesh, so that it was even a matter of doubt whether it was born or not. The soul, therefore (they further say), was made corporeal in Christ, in order that we might see it when undergoing birth, and death, and (what is more) resurrection. But yet, how was this possible, that by means of the flesh the soul should demonstrate itself 1 to itself or to us, when it could not possibly be ascertained that it would offer this mode of exhibiting itself by the flesh, until the thing came into existence to which it was unknown, 2 that is to say, the flesh? It received darkness, forsooth, in order to be able to shine! Now, 3 let us first turn our attention to this point, whether it was requisite that the soul should exhibit itself in the manner contended for; 4 and next consider whether their previous position be 5 that the soul is wholly invisible (inquiring further) whether this invisibility is the result of its incorporeality, or whether it actually possesses some sort of body peculiar to itself. And yet, although they say that it is invisible, they determine it to be corporeal, but having somewhat that is invisible. For if it has nothing invisible how can it be said to be invisible? But even its existence is an impossibility, unless it has that which is instrumental to its existence. 6 Since, however, it exists, it must needs have a something through which it exists. If it has this something, it must be its body. Everything which exists is a bodily existence sui generis. Nothing lacks bodily existence but that which is non-existent. If, then, the soul has an invisible body, He who had proposed to make it 7 visible would certainly have done His work better 8 if He had made that part of it which was accounted invisible, visible; because then there would have been no untruth or weakness in the case, and neither of these flaws is suitable to God. (But as the case stands in the hypothesis) there is untruth, since He has set forth the soul as being a different thing from what it really is; and there is weakness, since He was unable to make it appear 9 to be that which it is. No one who wishes to exhibit a man covers him with a veil 10 or a mask. This, however, is precisely what has been done to the soul, if it has been clothed with a covering belonging to something else, by being converted into flesh. But even if the soul is, on their hypothesis, supposed 11 to be incorporeal, so that the soul, whatever it is, should by some mysterious force of the reason 12 be quite unknown, only not be a body, then in that case it were not beyond the power of God--indeed it would be more consistent with His plan--if He displayed 13 the soul in some new sort of body, different from that which we all have in common, one of which we should have quite a different notion, 14 (being spared the idea that) 15 He had set His mind on 16 making, without an adequate cause, a visible soul instead of 17 an invisible one--a fit incentive, no doubt, for such questions as they start, 18 by their maintenance of a human flesh for it. 19 Christ, however, could not have appeared among men except as a man. Restore, therefore, to Christ, His faith; believe that He who willed to walk the earth as a man exhibited even a soul of a thoroughly human condition, not making it of flesh, but clothing it with flesh.


  1. Demonstraretur: or, "should become apparent." ↩

  2. Cui latebat. ↩

  3. Denique. ↩

  4. Isto modo. ↩

  5. An retro allegent. ↩

  6. Per quod sit. ↩

  7. Eam: the soul. ↩

  8. Dignius: i.e., "in a manner more worthy of Himself." ↩

  9. Demonstrare. ↩

  10. Cassidem. ↩

  11. Deputetur. ↩

  12. Aliqua vi rationis: or, "by some power of its own condition." ↩

  13. Demonstrare. ↩

  14. Notitiae. ↩

  15. Ne. ↩

  16. Gestisset. ↩

  17. Ex. ↩

  18. Istis. ↩

  19. In illam: perhaps "in it," as if an ablative case, not an unusual construction in Tertullian. ↩

  Imprimer   Rapporter une erreur
  • Afficher le texte
  • Référence bibliographique
  • Scans de cette version
Les éditions de cette œuvre
De carne Christi
Traductions de cette œuvre
De la chair de Jesus-Christ Comparer
On the Flesh of Christ
Über den Leib Christi. (BKV) Comparer
Commentaires sur cette œuvre
Elucidation - On the flesh of Christ

Table des matières

Faculté de théologie, Patristique et histoire de l'Église ancienne
Miséricorde, Av. Europe 20, CH 1700 Fribourg

© 2025 Gregor Emmenegger
Mentions légales
Politique de confidentialité