Tertullian — On Modesty 13

We know plainly at this point, too, the suspicions which they raise. For, in fact, they suspect the Apostle Paul of having, in the second (Epistle) to the Corinthians, granted pardon to the self-same fornicator whom in the first he has publicly sentenced to be surrendered to Satan , for the destruction of the flesh, — impious heir as he was to his father's wedlock; as if he subsequently erased his own words, writing: But if any has wholly saddened, he has not wholly saddened me , but in part, lest I burden you all. Sufficient is such a chiding which is given by many; so that, on the contrary, you should prefer to forgive and console, lest, perhaps, by more abundant sadness, such an one be devoured. For which reason, I pray you, confirm toward him affection.

For to this end withal have I written, that I may learn a proof of you, that in all (things) you are obedient to me. But if you shall have forgiven any, so (do) I; for I, too, if I have forgiven ought, have forgiven in the person of Christ , lest we be overreached by Satan , since we are not ignorant of his injections. What (reference) is understood here to the fornicator? What to the contaminator of his father's bed? what to the Christian who had overstepped the shamelessness of heathens ?— since, of course, he would have absolved by a special pardon one whom he had condemned by a special anger . He is more obscure in his pity than in his indignation. He is more open in his austerity than in his lenity. And yet, (generally), anger is more readily indirect than indulgence.

Things of a sadder are more wont to hesitate than things of a more joyous cast. Of course the question in hand concerned some moderate indulgence; which (moderation in the indulgence) was now, if ever, to be divined, when it is usual for all the greatest indulgences not to be granted without public proclamation, so far (are they from being granted) without particularization. Why, do you yourself, when introducing into the church, for the purpose of melting the brotherhood by his prayers , the repentant adulterer, lead into the midst and prostrate him, all in haircloth and ashes, a compound of disgrace and horror, before the widows , before the elders, suing for the tears of all, licking the footprints of all, clasping the knees of all?

And do you, good shepherd and blessed father that you are, to bring about the (desired) end of the man, grace your harangue with all the allurements of mercy in your power, and under the parable of the ewe go in quest of your goats? do you, for fear lest your ewe again take a leap out from the flock — as if that were no more lawful for the future which was not even once lawful — fill all the rest likewise full of apprehension at the very moment of granting indulgence? And would the apostle so carelessly have granted indulgence to the atrocious licentiousness of fornication burdened with incest, as not at least to have exacted from the criminal even this legally established garb of repentance which you ought to have learned from him? As to have uttered no commination on the past? No allocution touching the future?