The Marcionite Christ Was Named 'Man'

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 14745
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

The Marcionite Christ Was Named 'Man'

Post by Secret Alias »

This reverend course of nature (hanc venerationem naturae), you, O Marcion, spit upon (Marcion, despuis) and yet, in what way were you born (et quomodo natus es)? You detest a nascent man (odisti nascentem hominem) then how do you love anybody (et quomodo diligis aliquem)? You did not love yourself when you departed from the Church and the faith of Christ (te quidem plane non amasti cum ab ecclesia et fide Christi recessisti). But never mind, if you are not on good terms with yourself, or even if you were born in a way different from other people (sed videris si tibi displices aut si aliter es natus). Christ, at any rate, has loved even that man who was condensed in his mother's womb amidst all its uncleannesses (certe Christus dilexit hominem illum in immunditiis in utero coagulatum), even he who was brought into life out of the said womb (illum per pudenda prolatum), even he who was nursed amidst the nurse's simpers (illum per ludibria nutritum). For his sake He came down (propter eum descendit), for his sake He preached (propter eum praedicavit), for his sake "He humbled Himself even unto death the death of the cross." He loved, of course, the being whom He redeemed at so great a cost (amavit utique quem magno redemit). If Christ is the Creator's Son, it was with justice that He loved His own (Christus creatoris est, suum merito amavit); if He comes from another god, His love was excessive, since He redeemed a being who belonged to another (si ab alio deo est, magis adamavit, quando alienum redemit). Well, then, loving man He loved his own nativity also (amavit ergo cum homine etiam nativitatem), and his flesh as well ( etiam carnem eius). Nothing can be loved apart from that through which whatever exists has its existence (nihil amari potest sine eo per quod est id quod est). Either take away nativity, and then show us Man (aut aufer nativitatem et exhibe hominem); or else withdraw the flesh, and then present to our view the being whom God has redeemed (adime carnem et praesta quem deus redemit)- since it is these very conditions which constitute the man whom God has redeemed (si haec sunt homo quem deus redemit). And are you for turning these conditions into occasions of blushing to the very creature whom He has redeemed, us unworthy of Him who certainly would not have redeemed them had He not loved them?
Post Reply