On Patience 10

Summary: The desire for revenge is a chief form of impatience; it makes the one provoked as guilty as the provoker and usurps God's right to judge and avenge.

Textual problem in this passage: the printed text is uncertain or disputed here. See the notes.

Show

Latin text · CSEL 47:15–16

Est et alius summus impatientiae stimulus ultionis libido, negotium curans aut gloriae aut malitiae. sed et gloria ubique uana et malitia numquam non domino odiosa, hoc quidem loco cum maxime, cum alterius malitia prouocata superiorem se in exsequenda ultione constituit et remunerans nequam duplicat quod semel factum est. ultio penes errorem solacium uidetur doloris, penes ueritatem certamen redarguitur malignitatis. quid enim refert inter prouocantem et prouocatum, nisi quod ille prior in maleficio deprehenditur, at ille posterior? tamen uterque laesi hominis domino reus est, qui omne nequam et prohibet et damnat. nulla in maleficio ordinis ratio est, nec locus secernit quod similitudo coniungit. par factum par habet meritum. absolute itaque praecipitur malum malo non rependendum. quomodo id obseruabimus, si fastidientes in fastidio ultionis non erimus? quem autem honorem litabimus domino deo, si nobis arbitrium defensionis arrogauerimus? nos putres, uasa fictilia! seruulis nostris adsumentibus sibi de conseruis ultionem grauiter offendimur eosque, qui nobis patientiam obtulerint suam, ut memores humilitatis seruitutis suae, dominici honoris diligentes non probamus modo, sed ampliorem, quam ipsi sibi praesumpsissent, satisfactionem facimus. id nobis in domino tam iusto ad aestimandum, tam potenti ad perficiendum periclitatur? hoc se nobis repromittit dicens: uindictam mihi, et ego uindicabo, id est: patientiam tibi, et ego patientiam remunerabo. cum enim dicit: nolite iudicare, ne iudicemini, nonne patientiam flagitat? quis enim non iudicabit alium, nisi qui patiens erit non defendendi? quid ergo credimus iudicem illum, si non et ultorem? quis idcirco iudicat, ut ignoscat? ac si ignoscet, tamen iudicantis impatientiam cauerit et honorem unici iudicis [id est dei] abstulerit. quantos uero casus huiusmodi impatientia incursare consueuit! quotiens paenituit defensionem! quotiens instantia eius deterior inuenta est causis suis! quoniam nihil impatientia susceptum sine impetu transigi nouit, nihil impetu actum non aut offendit aut corruit aut praeceps abit. iam si leuius defenderis, insanies, si uberius, oneraberis. quid mihi cum ultione, cuius modum regere non possum per impatientiam doloris? quodsi patientiae incubabo, non dolebo; si non dolebo, ulcisci non desiderabo.

English · Claude translation

There is another supreme goad of impatience, the lust for revenge, which attends to the business either of glory or of malice. But glory is everywhere vain, and malice always hateful to the Lord; in this case most of all, when, provoked by another's malice, it sets itself up as superior in carrying out revenge, and, repaying wickedness, doubles what was done once. Revenge, in the view of error, seems a solace of grief; in the view of truth, it is convicted as a contest in malignity. For what difference is there between provoker and provoked, except that the one is caught first in wrongdoing, and the other later? Yet each is guilty, for injuring a man, before the Lord, who both forbids and condemns all wickedness. In wrongdoing no account is taken of order, nor does position separate what likeness joins. Like deeds have like deserts. So it is absolutely commanded that evil is not to be repaid for evil. How shall we observe this if, in our disdain, we do not disdain revenge? And what honor shall we offer to the Lord God if we arrogate to ourselves the decision of defending ourselves? We, rotten, earthen vessels! When our slaves take revenge on their fellow slaves, we are gravely offended; and those who have offered us their patience, mindful of the humility of their servitude, loving their master's honor, we not only approve but make them fuller satisfaction than they would have presumed for themselves. Is this at risk for us with a Lord so just in judging, so powerful in accomplishing? He promises us this, saying, “Vengeance is mine, and I will avenge,” that is: “Patience is yours, and I will reward patience.” For when he says, “Do not judge, that you be not judged,” does he not demand patience? For who will not judge another except one who is patient enough not to defend himself? Why, then, do we believe him a judge if not also an avenger? Who judges in order to pardon? And if he does pardon, still he will have guarded against the impatience of one who judges, and taken away the honor of the only Judge. And how many mishaps of this kind impatience is accustomed to run into! How often has one repented of defending oneself! How often has its vehemence been found worse than its causes! Since nothing undertaken by impatience knows how to be accomplished without violence, and nothing done with violence fails either to offend or to collapse or to rush headlong. Now, if you defend yourself too lightly, you will rage; if too fully, you will be burdened. What have I to do with revenge, whose measure I cannot control through impatience of grief? But if I rest on patience, I will not grieve; if I do not grieve, I will not desire to be avenged.

About this passage

Source
CSEL 47:15–16 · Emil Kroymann, ed., Quinti Septimi Florentis Tertulliani Opera, Pars 3, CSEL 47 (Vienna: Tempsky; Leipzig: Freytag, 1906), 1–24 · Latin text: Emil Kroymann (CSEL 47), digitized by Open Greek and Latin, University of Leipzig (csel-dev), CC BY-SA 4.0
Text
As printed in CSEL 47. Manuscript variants and the editor's apparatus are not reproduced; the problem in this passage is discussed in the notes.
Translation
Claude translation (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 · Translated by Claude from the Latin text of CSEL 47; made independently of existing English translations.
Compare
Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3 (1885) (an older public-domain English translation, whole volume at CCEL; checked against ours only after ours was made)
Scripture
Topics
Ethics

Notes

Translation notes

  • The digital text lacks a full stop before “ultio penes errorem” and has stray asterisks and “ei” for “si”, corrected here. The quotations are Rom 12:19 (Deut 32:35) and Matt 7:1; the allusions are Rom 12:17 (1 Thess 5:15) and 2 Cor 4:7 (“earthen vessels”). “The only Judge” recalls Jas 4:12; the editor deletes the gloss “id est dei” (“that is, God”).

Notes on the original text

  • Digital text corrected (OCR slip; missing punctuation in the digital text; stray character in the digital text; stray characters in the digital text): factum est ultio → factum est. ultio; fastidientes * in → fastidientes in; ei nobis arbitrium → si nobis arbitrium; periclitatur? ** hoc → periclitatur? hoc.

Cite this passage

Tertullian, Pat. 10 (trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-patientia/10/).

Plain text
Tertullian, Pat. 10 (trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-patientia/10/).

Download citation:BibTeX ·RIS (Zotero, EndNote)

Whole work:BibTeX ·RIS ·Markdown text

Report an error in this passage