Against Praxeas 25
Summary: In John's Gospel Christ promises “another” Paraclete, calls the Father the vinedresser, and after the resurrection speaks of ascending “to my Father and your Father”; the Gospel itself says it was written so that we might believe that Jesus is the Son.
Textual problem in this passage: the printed text is uncertain or disputed here. See the notes.
Latin text · CSEL 47:276–277
Post Philippum et totam substantiam quaestionis istius. quae in finem euangelii perseuerat, in eodem genere sermonis quo [pater] et filius in sua proprietate distinguitur, paracletum quoque a patre se postulaturum, cum ascendisset ad patrem, et missurum repromittit, et quidem alium. sed iam praemisimus quomodo alium. ceterum: de meo sumet, inquit. sicut ipse de patris. ita conexus patris in filio et filii in paracleto tres efficit cohaerentes, alterum ex altero. qui tres unum sunt, non unus, quomodo dictum est: ego et pater unum sumus, ad substantiae unitatem, non ad numeri singularitatem. percurre adhuc et inuenies quem patrem credis uitem patris dictum et patrem agricolam, uti quem in terra tu putas fuisse, hunc rursus in caelis a filio agnosci, cum illuc respiciens discipulos suos patri tradit. sed et si in isto euangelio non est reuelatum: deus meus, ad quid me dereliquisti? et: pater, in tuis manibus depone spiritum meum, tamen post resurrectionem et deuictae gloriam mortis exposita necessitate omnis humilitatis, cum iam patrem se posset ostendere tam fideli feminae, ex dilectione, non ex curiositate nec ex incredulitate Thomae tangere eum adgressae: ne inquit, contigeris me, nondum ascendi ad patrem meum. uade autem ad fratres meos — quibus et in hoc (se) filium ostendit; filios enim appellasset illos, si pater fuisset — et dices eis: ascendo ad patrem meum et patrem uestrum et deum meum et deum uestrum. pater ad patrem, et deus ad deum? an filius ad patrem, et sermo ad deum? ipsa quoque clausula euangelii propter quid consignat haec scripta, nisi: ut credatis, inquit, Iesum Christum filium dei? igitur quaecumque ex his putaueris ad demonstrationem eiusdem patris et filii proficere tibi posse, aduersus definitiuam euangelii sententiam niteris. non ideo enim scripta sunt, ut patrem credas Iesum Christum, sed ut filium.
English · Claude translation
After Philip, and the whole substance of this question, which continues to the end of the Gospel, in the same kind of discourse in which the Son is distinguished in his own individuality, he promises that when he has ascended to the Father he will ask the Father for the Paraclete too, and will send him, and indeed “another.” But we have already explained in what sense “another.” Further: “He will take from what is mine,” he says, just as he himself takes from what is the Father's. So the connection of the Father in the Son and of the Son in the Paraclete makes three who cohere, one from another. These three are one thing, not one person, as it was said, “I and the Father are one,” with regard to unity of substance, not to singleness of number. Run through the rest, and you will find that the one you believe to be the Father is called the Father's vine, and the Father the vinedresser; so that the one you think was on earth is again recognized by the Son as in heaven, when, looking up there, he commends his disciples to the Father. And even if it is not revealed in this Gospel, “My God, why have you forsaken me?” and, “Father, into your hands I lay down my spirit,” yet after the resurrection and the glory of death overcome, when the necessity of all humiliation had been set aside, when he could now have shown himself to be the Father to so faithful a woman, who approached to touch him out of love, not out of curiosity nor out of the unbelief of Thomas, he says: “Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brothers” (and in this too he shows himself to be the Son; for he would have called them sons if he had been the Father) “and tell them: I am ascending to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God.” The Father to the Father, and God to God? Or the Son to the Father, and the Word to God? Why, too, does the very close of the Gospel set its seal on these writings, if not, “that you may believe,” he says, “that Jesus Christ is the Son of God”? So whatever of these passages you may think can serve you to prove that the Father and the Son are the same, you are struggling against the defining statement of the Gospel. For they were not written so that you might believe that Jesus Christ is the Father, but the Son.
About this passage
Notes
Translation notes
- The quotations and allusions are John 14:16, 16:14, 10:30, 15:1, 17:11, Matt 27:46, Luke 23:46, John 20:17, 20:27, and 20:31. The three are unum (“one thing”), not unus (“one person”); compare ch. 22. The editor deletes “pater” (“in which the Father and the Son are distinguished”); it is omitted. The digital text's “demeo” is corrected.
Notes on the original text
- Digital text corrected (words run together in the digital text): demeo sumet → de meo sumet.
Cite this passage
Tertullian, Prax. 25 (trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-praxean/25/).
Plain text
Tertullian, Prax. 25 (trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-praxean/25/).
Download citation:BibTeX ·RIS (Zotero, EndNote)
Whole work:BibTeX ·RIS ·Markdown text