On the Flesh of Christ.

 V.

 Chapter II.—Marcion, Who Would Blot Out the Record of Christ’s Nativity, is Rebuked for So Startling a Heresy.

 Chapter III.—Christ’s Nativity Both Possible and Becoming. The Heretical Opinion of Christ’s Apparent Flesh Deceptive and Dishonourable to God, Even o

 Chapter IV.—God’s Honour in the Incarnation of His Son Vindicated.  Marcion’s Disparagement of Human Flesh Inconsistent as Well as Impious. Christ Has

 Chapter V.—Christ Truly Lived and Died in Human Flesh. Incidents of His Human Life on Earth, and Refutation of Marcion’s Docetic Parody of the Same.

 Chapter VI.—The Doctrine of Apelles Refuted, that Christ’s Body Was of Sidereal Substance, Not Born. Nativity and Mortality are Correlative Circumstan

 Chapter VII.—Explanation of the Lord’s Question About His Mother and His Brethren. Answer to the Cavils of Apelles and Marcion, Who Support Their Deni

 Chapter VIII.—Apelles and His Followers, Displeased with Our Earthly Bodies, Attributed to Christ a Body of a Purer Sort. How Christ Was Heavenly Even

 Chapter IX.—Christ’s Flesh Perfectly Natural, Like Our Own. None of the Supernatural Features Which the Heretics Ascribed to It Discoverable, on a Car

 Chapter X.—Another Class of Heretics Refuted. They Alleged that Christ’s Flesh Was of a Finer Texture, Animalis, Composed of Soul.

 Chapter XI.—The Opposite Extravagance Exposed.  That is Christ with a Soul Composed of Flesh—Corporeal, Though Invisible. Christ’s Soul, Like Ours, Di

 Chapter XII.—The True Functions of the Soul. Christ Assumed It in His Perfect Human Nature, Not to Reveal and Explain It, But to Save It. Its Resurrec

 Chapter XIII.—Christ’s Human Nature.  The Flesh and the Soul Both Fully and Unconfusedly Contained in It.

 Chapter XIV.—Christ Took Not on Him an Angelic Nature, But the Human. It Was Men, Not Angels, Whom He Came to Save.

 Chapter XV.—The Valentinian Figment of Christ’s Flesh Being of a Spiritual Nature, Examined and Refuted Out of Scripture.

 Chapter XVI.—Christ’s Flesh in Nature, the Same as Ours, Only Sinless. The Difference Between Carnem Peccati and Peccatum Carnis: It is the Latter Whi

 Chapter XVII.—The Similarity of Circumstances Between the First and the Second Adam, as to the Derivation of Their Flesh. An Analogy Also Pleasantly T

 Chapter XVIII.—The Mystery of the Assumption of Our Perfect Human Nature by the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. He is Here Called, as Often Else

 Chapter XIX.—Christ, as to His Divine Nature, as the Word of God, Became Flesh, Not by Carnal Conception, Nor by the Will of the Flesh and of Man, But

 Chapter XX.—Christ Born of a Virgin, of Her Substance. The Physiological Facts of His Real and Exact Birth of a Human Mother, as Suggested by Certain

 Chapter XXI.—The Word of God Did Not Become Flesh Except in the Virgin’s Womb and of Her Substance. Through His Mother He is Descended from Her Great

 Chapter XXII.—Holy Scripture in the New Testament, Even in Its Very First Verse, Testifies to Christ’s True Flesh.  In Virtue of Which He is Incorpora

 Chapter XXIII.—Simeon’s “Sign that Should Be Contradicted,” Applied to the Heretical Gainsaying of the True Birth of Christ. One of the Heretics’ Para

 Chapter XXIV.—Divine Strictures on Various Heretics Descried in Various Passages of Prophetical Scripture. Those Who Assail the True Doctrine of the O

 Chapter XXV.—Conclusion. This Treatise Forms a Preface to the Other Work, “On the Resurrection of the Flesh,” Proving the Reality of the Flesh Which W

Chapter XX.—Christ Born of a Virgin, of Her Substance. The Physiological Facts of His Real and Exact Birth of a Human Mother, as Suggested by Certain Passages of Scripture.

But to what shifts you resort, in your attempt to rob the syllable ex (of)273    Indicating the material or ingredient, “out of.” of its proper force as a preposition, and to substitute another for it in a sense not found throughout the Holy Scriptures!  You say that He was born through274    Per. a virgin, not of275    Ex. a virgin, and in a womb, not of a womb, because the angel in the dream said to Joseph, “That which is born in her” (not of her) “is of the Holy Ghost.”276    Matt. i. 20. But the fact is, if he had meant “of her,” he must have said “in her;” for that which was of her, was also in her. The angel’s expression, therefore, “in her,” has precisely the same meaning as the phrase “of her.” It is, however, a fortunate circumstance that Matthew also, when tracing down the Lord’s descent from Abraham to Mary, says, “Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Christ.”277    Matt. i. 16. But Paul, too, silences these critics278    Grammaticis. when he says, “God sent forth His Son, made of a woman.”279    Gal. iv. 4. Does he mean through a woman, or in a woman? Nay more, for the sake of greater emphasis, he uses the word “made” rather than born, although the use of the latter expression would have been simpler.  But by saying “made,” he not only confirmed the statement, “The Word was made flesh,”280    John i. 14. but he also asserted the reality of the flesh which was made of a virgin. We shall have also the support of the Psalms on this point, not the “Psalms” indeed of Valentinus the apostate, and heretic, and Platonist, but the Psalms of David, the most illustrious saint and well-known prophet. He sings to us of Christ, and through his voice Christ indeed also sang concerning Himself. Hear, then, Christ the Lord speaking to God the Father: “Thou art He that didst draw281    Avulsisti. me out of my mother’s womb.”282    Ps. xxii. 9. Here is the first point. “Thou art my hope from my mother’s breasts; upon Thee have I been cast from the womb.”283    Vers. 9, 10. Here is another point. “Thou art my God from my mother’s belly.”284    Ver. 10. Here is a third point. Now let us carefully attend to the sense of these passages. “Thou didst draw me,” He says, “out of the womb.” Now what is it which is drawn, if it be not that which adheres, that which is firmly fastened to anything from which it is drawn in order to be sundered? If He clove not to the womb, how could He have been drawn from it? If He who clove thereto was drawn from it, how could He have adhered to it, if it were not that, all the while He was in the womb, He was tied to it, as to His origin,285    i.e. of His flesh. by the umbilical cord, which communicated growth to Him from the matrix? Even when one strange matter amalgamates with another, it becomes so entirely incorporated286    Concarnatus et convisceratus: “united in flesh and internal structure.” with that with which it amalgamates, that when it is drawn off from it, it carries with it some part of the body from which it is torn, as if in consequence of the severance of the union and growth which the constituent pieces had communicated to each other.  But what were His “mother’s breasts” which He mentions? No doubt they were those which He sucked. Midwives, and doctors, and naturalists, can tell us, from the nature of women’s breasts, whether they usually flow at any other time than when the womb is affected with pregnancy, when the veins convey therefrom the blood of the lower parts287    Sentinam illam inferni sanguinis. to the mamilla, and in the act of transference convert the secretion into the nutritious288    Lactiorem. substance of milk. Whence it comes to pass that during the period of lactation the monthly issues are suspended. But if the Word was made flesh of Himself without any communication with a womb, no mother’s womb operating upon Him with its usual function and support, how could the lacteal fountain have been conveyed (from the womb) to the breasts, since (the womb) can only effect the change by actual possession of the proper substance? But it could not possibly have had blood for transformation into milk, unless it possessed the causes of blood also, that is to say, the severance (by birth)289    Avulsionem. of its own flesh from the mother’s womb. Now it is easy to see what was the novelty of Christ’s being born of a virgin. It was simply this, that (He was born) of a virgin in the real manner which we have indicated, in order that our regeneration might have virginal purity,—spiritually cleansed from all pollutions through Christ, who was Himself a virgin, even in the flesh, in that He was born of a virgin’s flesh.

CAPUT XX.

Qualis est autem tortuositas vestra, ut ipsam ex syllabam, praepositionis officio adscriptam, auferre quaeratis, et alia magis uti, quae in hac specie non invenitur penes Scripturas sanctas? Per virginem dicitis natum, non ex virgine; et in vulva, non ex vulva. Quia et angelus in somnis ad Joseph: Nam quod in ea natum est, inquit (Matth., I), de Spiritu Sancto est; non dixit ex ea. Nempe tamen, etsi ex ea dixisset, in ea dixerat: in ea enim erat, quod ex ea erat. Tantumdem 0785C ergo, et cum dicit, in ea, et ex ea consonat; quia ex ea erat, quod in ea erat. Sed bene, quod idem dicit Matthaeus, originem Domini decurrens ab 0786A Abraham usque ad Mariam: Jacob, inquit, generavit Joseph, virum Mariae, ex qua nascitur Christus. Sed et Paulus grammaticis istis silentium imponit: Misit, inquit (Gal., IV, 4), Deus Filium suum factum ex muliere. Numquid per mulierem, aut in muliere ? Hoc quidem impressius, quod factum potius dicit, quam natum: simplicius enim enuntiasset natum. Factum autem dicendo, et verbum caro factum est consignavit, et carnis veritatem ex virgine factae asseveravit. Nobis quoque ad hanc speciem Psalmi patrocinabuntur, non quidem apostatae, et haeretici, et platonici Valentini, sed sanctissimi et receptissimi prophetae David. Ille apud nos canit Christum, per quem se cecinit ipse Christus. Accipe Christum, et audi Dominum Patri Deo colloquentem (Ps., XXI): 0786BQuia tu es qui avulsisti me ex utero matris meae: ecce unum. Et spes mea ab uberibus matris meae; super te sum projectus ex vulva: ecce aliud : Et ab utero matris meae Deus meus es tu: ecce aliud . Nunc ad sensus ipsos decertemus. Avulsisti me , inquit, ex utero. Quid avellitur, nisi quod inhaeret, quod infixum, innexum est ei, a quo, ut auferatur, avellitur? Si non adhaesit utero, quomodo avulsus est? si adhaesit qui avulsus est, quomodo adhaesisset, nisi dum ex utero est per illum nervum umbilicarem, quasi folliculi sui traducem , adnexus origini vulvae . Etiam cum quid extraneum extraneo agglutinatur, ita concarnatur et convisceratur cum eo cui agglutinatur, ut cum avellitur, rapiat secum ex corpore aliquid a quo avellitur, quasi sequelam 0786C quamdam abruptae unitatis, et producis mutui coitus. Caeterum quae ubera matris suae nominat? Sine dubio, quae hausit. Respondeant obstetrices, 0787A medici et physici, de uberum natura, an aliter manare soleant, sine vulvae genitali passione, suspendentibus exinde venis sentinam illam inferni sanguinis , et ipsa translatione decoquentibus in materiam lactis laetiorem . Inde adeo fit, ut uberum tempore, menses sanguinum vacent. Quod si Verbum caro ex se factum est, non ex vulvae communicatione, nihil operata vulva, nihil functa , nihil passa; quomodo fontem suum transfudit in ubera, quae, nisi habendo, non mutat? Habere autem sanguinem non potuit lacti subministrando, si non haberet caussas sanguinis ipsius, avulsionem scilicet suae carnis. Quid fuerit novitatis in Christo ex virgine nascendi, palam est: scilicet, solummodo hoc, quod ex virgine, secundum rationem quam edidimus; 0787B et uti virgo esset regeneratio nostra, spiritaliter ab omnibus inquinamentis sanctificata per Christum, virginem et ipsum, etiam carnaliter, ut ex virginis carne.