205 [It is not the unrighteous, be it remembered, who go to "purgatory," according to the Trent theology, but only true Christians, dying in full communion with the Church. Hippolytus is here speaking of the ultimate doom of the wicked, but bears in mind the imagery of Luke xvi. 24 and the appeal to Abraham.)
210 The following words are the words of the Symbolum, as it is extant in Irenaeus, i. 10, etc., and iii. 4; and in Tertullian, Contra Praxiam, ch. ii., and De Praescript., ch. xiii., and De virginibus velandis, ch. i. [See vol. iii,, this series.]
217 kai autoij monokwla xrwmenoi, etc. The word monokwlaappears to be used advervially, instead oft monokwlwj and monotupwj, which are the terms employed by Epiphanius (p. 481) The meaning is, that the Noetians, in explaining the words of Scripture concerning Christ, looked only to one side of the question - namely, to the divine nature; just as Theodotus, on his part going to the opposite extreme, kept by the human nature exclusively, and held that Christ was a mere man. Besides others, the presbyter Timotheus, in Colelerii Monument, vol. iii. p. 389, mentions Theodotus in these terms: "They say that this Theodotus was the leader and father of the heresy of the Samosatan, having first alleged that Christ was a mere man." [See vol. iii, p. 654, this series.]
223 Turrian has the following note: "The Word of God constituted (operatum est) one Son to God; i.e., the Word of God effected, that He who was the one Son of God was also one Son of man, because as His hypostasis He assumed the flesh. For thus was the Word made flesh."
. So also in the Constitutiones Apostol., vii. 37, viii. 15; Eusebius, Praeparat., xi. 6, p. 519, and in many others. To the same class may be referred those who make Israel = oratikoj anhr kai qewrhtikoj, a man apt to see and speculate, as Eusebius, Praeparot., p. 310, or = nouj opwn qeon, as Optatus in the end of the second book; Didymus in Jerome, and Jerome himself in various passages; Maximus, i. p. 284; Olympiodorus on Ecclesiastes, ch. i.; Leontius, De Sectis, p. 392; Theophanes, Ceram. homil., iv. p. 22, etc. Justin Martyr, Dialog. cum Tryph.. [see vol. i. pp. 226, 262], adduces another etymology, anqrwpoj nikwn dunamin.
236 i.e., the other thirty-one heresies, which Hippolytus had already attacked. From these words it is apparent also that this treatise was the closing portion of a book against the heresies (Fabricius).
243 The "begetting" of which Hippolytus speaks here is not the generation, properly so called, but that manifestation and bringing forth of the Word co-existing from eternity with the Father, which referred to the creation of the world. So at least Bull and Bossuet, as cited above; also Maranus, De Divinit. F. C., lib. iv. cap. xiii. § 3, p. 458.
244 fwj ek fwtoj. This phrase, adopted by the Nicene Fathers, occurs before their time not only here, but also in Justin Martyr, Tatian, and Athenagoras, as is noticed by Grabe, ad Irenaeum, lib. ii. c. xxiii. Methodius also, in his Homily on Simwon and Anna, p. 152, has the expression, su ei fwj alhqinon ek fwtoj alhqinou Qeoj alhqinoj ek Qeou alhqinon. Athanasius himself also uses the phrase luxnon ek luxnou, vol. i. p. 881, ed. Lips. [Illustratinq my remarks (p. v. of this volume), in the preface, as to the study of Nicene theology in Ante-Vicene authors].
246 Justin Martyr also says that the Son is eteron ti, something other, from the Father; and Tertullian affirms, Filium et Patrem esse aluid ab alio, with the same intent as Hippolytus here, viz., to express the distinction of persons. [See vol. i. pp. 170, 216, 263, and vol. iii. p. 604.]
251 John i. 1-3. Hippolytus evidently puts the full stop at the oude en, attaching the o gegonen to the following. So also Irenaeus, Clemens Alex., Origen, Theopbilus of Antioch, and Eusebius, in severa/ places; so, too, of the Latin Fathers-Tertullian, Lactantius, Victorinus, Augustine: and long after these, Honorius Augustoduneneis, in his De imagine Mundi. This punctuation was also adopted by the heretics Vilcntinus, Heracleon, Theodotus, and the Macedonians and Eunomians; and hence it is rejected by Epiphanius, ii. p. 80, and Chrysostoin. (Fabricius.)
257 to qelhma. Many of the patristic theologians called the Son the Father's boulhsij or qelhma. See the passages in Petavius, De S. S. Trinitate, lib. vi. c. 8,§ 21, and vii. 12, § 12. [Dubious.]9 From this passage it is clear that Hippolytus taught the doctrine of one God alone and three Persons. A little before, in the eighth chapter, he said that there is one God, according to substance or divine essence, which one substance is in three Persons; and that, according to disposition or economy, there are three Persons minifested. By the term economy, therefore, he understands, with Tertullian, adversus Praxcam. ch. iii., the number and disposition of the Trinity ( numerum et dispositionem Trinitatis). Here he also calls the grace of the Holy Spirit the third economy, but in the same way as Tertullian, who calls the Holy Spirit the third grade ( tertium grandum). For the terms gradus, forma, species, dispositio, and aeconimia mean the same in Tertuliian. (Maranus.) Another proof that the Nicene Creed was a collection of AnteNicene theologians.]
259 This mode of speaking of the Father's commanding, and the Son's obeying, was used without any offence, not only by Iranaeus, Hippolytus, Origen, and others before the Council of Nicaea, but also after that council by the keenest opponents of the Arian heresy -Athanasius, Basil, Marius Victorinus, Hilary, Prosper, and other. See Petavius, De Trin., i. 7, § 7; and Bull, Defens Fid. Nic., pp. 138, 164, 167, 170. (Fabricius.)
262 The Christian doctrine, Maranus remarks, could not be set forth more accurately; for he contends not only that the number of Persons in no manner detracts from the unity of God, but that the unity of God itself can neither consist nor be adored without this number of Persons.
271 Hippolytus thus gives more definite expression to this temporality of the Sonship, as Dorner remarks, than even Tertullian. See Dorner's Doctrine of the Person of Christ (T. & T. Clark), div. i. vol. ii. p. 88, etc. [Pearson On the Creed, art. ii. p. 199 et seqq. The patristic citations are sufficient, and Hippolytus may be harmonized with them.]
273 "Sustasij," says Dornery "be it observed, is not yet equiva1ent to personality. The sense is, it had its subsistence in the Logos; He was the connective and vehicular force. This is thoroughly unobjectionable. He does not thus necessarily pronounce the humanity of Christ impersonal; although in view of what has preceded, and what remains to be adduced, there can be no doubt [?] that Hippolytus would have defende the impersonality, had the question been agitated at the period at which he lived." See Dorner, as above, i. 95. [But compare Burton, Testimonies of the Ante-Nicene Father, etc., pp. 60-87, where Tertullian and Hippolytus speak for themselves. Note also what he says of the latter, and his variations of expression, p. 87.]
276 pneuma. The divine in Christ is thus designated in the AnteNicene Fathers generally. See Grotius on Mark ii. 8: and for a full history of the term in this use, Dorner's Person of Christ, i. p. 390, etc. (Clark).
Bible | Daily Readings | Agbeya | Books | Lyrics | Gallery | Media | Links
Short URL (link):