Humanitext Reader

Tertullian · On Flight in Persecution §5

The Futility of Flight and the Case of Rutilius

Passage 4 of 11 · Latin

Summary

Addressing the argument for flight (fleeing to avoid denial, while leaving apprehension to God's will), the author counters that this already presumes denial and that one should rather expect to confess. He adduces the example of the martyr Rutilius, who fled repeatedly but was eventually martyred, illustrating that flight is useless without God's will.

§5Sed quod meum est, inquit, fugio, ne peream, si negavero; illius est, si voluerit, etiam fugientem me reducere in medium.
"But," he says, "as for what is my part, I flee lest I perish if I deny; it is His part, if He wills, to bring me back into the midst even as I flee." Answer me this first: are you certain that you will deny if you do not flee, or are you uncertain?
Hoc mihi prius responde: certus es te negaturum, si non fugeris, an incertus? Si enim certus, iam negasti, quia praesumendo te negaturum id despopondisti de quo praesumpsisti, et vane iam fugis, ne neges, qui, si negaturus es, iam negasti.
For if you are certain, you have already denied, because by assuming that you will deny, you have pledged that which you assumed, and you now flee in vain lest you deny, since, if you are going to deny, you have already denied.
Si vero incertus es, cur non ex aequalitate incerti metus inter utrumque eventum etiam confiteri te posse praesumis et salvum magis fieri, quo minus fugias, sicut negaturum te praesumis, ut fugias? Iam nunc aut in nobis est utrumque aut totum in deo.
But if you are uncertain, why, from the equality of uncertain fear between both outcomes, do you not also assume that you can confess and rather be saved by not fleeing, just as you assume you will deny so that you may flee? Now indeed, either both are in our power, or all is in God's.
Si in nobis est confiteri aut negare, cur non id praesumimus, quod est melius, id est confessuros nos? Nisi si vis confiteri, pati non vis; nolle autem confiteri negare est.
If it is in our power to confess or to deny, why do you not assume that which is better, namely, that we will confess? Unless indeed you wish to confess, but do not wish to suffer; but to be unwilling to confess is to deny.
Si vero in deo totum est, cur non totum relinquimus arbitrio eius agnoscentes virtutem et potestatem, quod possit nos sicut fugientes reducere in medium, ita et non fugientes, immo et in medio populo conversantes obumbrare? Quale est, ut ad fugiendum deo honorem reddas, qui possit te etiam fugientem producere in medium, ad contestandum autem inhonores illum desperans potentiam protectionis ab illo? Quare non magis ex hac parte constantiae et fiduciae in deum dicis: Ego quod meum est facio; non discedo;
But if all is in God's power, why do we not leave all to His will, acknowledging His strength and power, in that He is able, just as He can bring back those who flee into the midst, so also to protect those who do not flee, and indeed those who move about in the midst of the people? What kind of thing is it, that for the sake of fleeing you render honor to God, who can bring you forward into the midst even when fleeing, but for the sake of testifying you dishonor Him, despairing of the power of protection from Him? Why do you not rather say, from this side of constancy and trust in God: "I do what is my part; I do not depart; God, if He wills, will Himself protect me"?
deus, si voluerit, ipse me proteget? Hoc potius nostrum est, stare sub dei arbitrio, quam fugere sub nostre.
This is rather our part, to stand under God's will, than to flee under our own.
Rutilius sanctissimus martyr, cum totiens fugisset persecutionem de loco in locum, etiam periculum, ut putabat, nummis redemisset, post totam securitatem, quam sibi prospexerat, ex inopinato apprehensus et praesidi oblatus tormentis dissipatus, credo pro fugae castigatione, dehinc ignibus datus passionem, quam vitarat, misericordiae dei retulit.
Rutilius, the most holy martyr, although he had so many times fled persecution from place to place, and had even, as he thought, redeemed the danger with money, after all the security which he had provided for himself, was unexpectedly apprehended, presented to the governor, and torn to pieces by tortures (I believe as a punishment for his flight), then given to the fires, he attributed to the mercy of God the passion which he had avoided.
Quid aliud voluit dominus nobis demonstrare hoc documento, quam fugiendum non esse, quia nihil fuga prosit, si deus nolit?
What else did the Lord wish to demonstrate to us by this proof, than that we must not flee, because flight profits nothing if God does not will it?

Notes

  1. §5quod meum est... illius est — The neuter substantival use of the possessive pronoun (meum) and the genitive (illius). Combined with 'est', they express duty or province: 'what is my part' and 'what is His (God's) part'.
  2. §5qui, si negaturus es, iam negasti — The antecedent of the relative pronoun 'qui' is the implied subject of the sentence ('you'). A conditional clause 'si negaturus es' is nested within the relative clause, resulting in the complex structure: 'you, who, if you are going to deny, have already denied'.
  3. §5quo minus fugias — Not the conjunction 'quominus' (lest), but a combination of the ablative of measure of difference 'quo' and the comparative 'minus'. It correlates with 'magis' in the main clause, functioning adverbially to mean 'by so much less fleeing' (i.e., 'by not fleeing').
  4. §5Nisi si vis confiteri, pati non vis — The phrase 'nisi si' is an idiomatic expression introducing an exceptional condition, meaning 'unless indeed' or 'except if'. Here it ironically points out the contradictory excuse of the interlocutor.
  5. §5Quale est, ut... reddas... inhonores — The construction 'Quale est, ut...' followed by the subjunctive (reddas, inhonores) is an exclamatory or rhetorical phrasing used to express indignation or absurdity, meaning 'What kind of thing is it that...' or 'How is it right that...'.
  6. §5misericordiae dei retulit — The verb 'retulit' (perfect of referre), which typically takes 'ad' with the accusative to mean 'attribute something to something', here governs the dative (or genitive) 'misericordiae' directly to mean 'he attributed the passion to the mercy of God'.

Cite this passage

Tertullian, On Flight in Persecution §5. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:stoa0275.stoa016.humanitext-lat1:5

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.