Anf-02 vi.iv.vi.xvii Pg 3.1
Anf-03 v.iv.v.xviii Pg 21
Tertullian stands alone in the notion that St. John’s inquiry was owing to any withdrawal of the Spirit, so soon before his martyrdom, or any diminution of his faith. The contrary is expressed by Origen, Homil. xxvii., on Luke vii.; Chrysostom on Matt. xi.; Augustine, Sermon. 66, de Verbo; Hilary on Matthew; Jerome on Matthew, and Epist. 121, ad Algas.; Ambrose on Luke, book v. § 93. They say mostly that the inquiry was for the sake of his disciples. (Oxford Library of the Fathers, vol. x. p. 267, note e). [Elucidation V.]
and return back again of course to the Lord, as to its all-embracing original.4156 4156 Ut in massalem suam summam.
Therefore John, being now an ordinary person, and only one of the many,4157 4157 Unus jam de turba.
was offended indeed as a man, but not because he expected or thought of another Christ as teaching or doing nothing new, for he was not even expecting such a one.4158 4158 Eundem.
Nobody will entertain doubts about any one whom (since he knows him not to exist) he has no expectation or thought of. Now John was quite sure that there was no other God but the Creator, even as a Jew, especially as a prophet.4159 4159 Etiam prophetes.
Whatever doubt he felt was evidently rather4160 4160 Facilius.
entertained about Him4161 4161 Jesus.
whom he knew indeed to exist but knew not whether He were the very Christ. With this fear, therefore, even John asks the question, “Art thou He that should come, or look we for another?”4162 4162
