Migne Reading Room
PG 10 · cols. 271–392
G. Lumper, O.S.B., Dissertatio de vita et scriptis S. Hippolyti
Editors' preface
P. GOTTFRIDI LUMPER DISSERTATIO DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS SANCTI HIPPOLYTI.
THE DISSERTATION OF FR GOTTFRIED LUMPER ON THE LIFE AND WRITINGS OF ST HIPPOLYTUS.
(Historia critica SS. Patrum, t. VIII, Augustae Vindelic., 1791, in-8°.)
(Critical History of the Holy Fathers, vol. VIII, Augsburg, 1791, octavo.)
CAPUT PRIMUM.
CHAPTER ONE.
HISTORIA VITAE SANCTI HIPPOLYTI.
THE HISTORY OF THE LIFE OF ST HIPPOLYTUS.
ARTICULUS I.
ARTICLE I.
DE S. HIPPOLYTI PATRIA, PRAECEPTORIBUS, LITTERARUM STUDIIS, ET TEMPORE QUO FLORUIT.
ON THE COUNTRY OF ST HIPPOLYTUS, HIS TEACHERS, HIS LITERARY STUDIES, AND THE TIME AT WHICH HE FLOURISHED.
Hippolytos plurimos novit antiquitas: caeteris tamen illustrior est Portuensis episcopus, quem generis nobilitas, utpote senatorii ordinis (ut auctor est Hieronymus), episcopalis dignitas, magna eruditio, et martyrii gloria posteritati celeberrimum reddiderunt. Dolendum, quod pleraque, quae ad vitae ejus historiam pertinent, nec satis perspicua, nec certa sint. Quae speciatim de ejus patria, praeceptoribus, ac tempore, quo ingenio et meritis suis floruit, a scriptoribus traduntur, inter se discrepant, nec pro exploratis haberi possunt. Inprimis dissensio est auctorum de loco, quo oriundus. Si Stephanum le Moyne, Guil. Caveum et Jac. Basnage audiamus, dicendum foret Hippolytum gente fuisse Arabem, et patriam habuisse divinis humanisque litteris florentissimam. Verum cum in suae opinionis confirmationem nullum antiquitatis monumentum producant, non video, cur tam recentium auctorum nudo asserto quoad factum ab eorum aetate tam remotum fides habenda sit. Sunt alii, qui credunt nostrum Hippolytum origine Romanum
Antiquity knew very many men named Hippolytus: yet more illustrious than the rest is the bishop of Portus, whom nobility of birth, as being of senatorial rank (as Jerome is the authority), episcopal dignity, great erudition, and the glory of martyrdom have rendered most celebrated to posterity. It is to be lamented that most of the things which pertain to the history of his life are neither sufficiently clear nor certain. The things which are specially handed down by writers concerning his country, his teachers, and the time at which he flourished by his genius and merits, disagree among themselves and cannot be held as established. In the first place, there is disagreement among authors concerning the place from which he originated. If we should listen to Stephen Le Moyne, William Cave, and Jacques Basnage, it would have to be said that Hippolytus was an Arab by race, and had a country most flourishing in divine and human letters. But since in confirmation of their opinion they produce no monument of antiquity, I do not see why credence should be given to the bare assertion of such recent authors regarding a fact so remote from their age. There are others who believe that our Hippolytus was by origin a Roman;
Editors' notes and page, col. 271
Footnotes
(3) ‹anchor: ut auctor est Hieronymus› · call in col 271
Hippolytus quoque et Apollonius, Romanae urbis senatores, propria opuscula condiderunt. Hieronym. epistol. 70 ad Magnum. At Remigius Ceillier in Hist. général. des auteurs, tom. II, pag. 316, in notis ad articulum primum, cap. 27 solerter observat, ita duntaxat in aliquibus editionibus legi; nam in antiquis mss., quibus Marianus Victorius praesul Italus in editione Operum S. Hieronymi usus est, teste eodem scriptore Gallo, pro voce senatores, legitur Senator, ita ut haec dignitas tribuatur soli Apollonio, cui certe convenit, cum S. Hieronymus in libro De viris illustribus, cap. 42, eamdem rursus ei ascribat, et ibidem cap. 61, in elogio S. Hippolyti, de illa dignitate senatoria nullam mentionem faciat. Clarissimus etiam Dominicus Vallarsius, novissimus Operum D. Hieronymi editor, tom. I, part. I, pag. 361, itidem notat, quod falso Erasmum secuti editores Benedictini Operum D. Hieronymi legerint: Hippolytus quoque et Apollonius Romanae urbis senatores; cum de Apollonio tantum, ut ex Catalogo liquet, dictum sit; imo cum nedum de Hippolyto, sed de Apollonio ipso alii dubitent, fueritne unquam senator, an proprio ingenio ex Eusebio Hieronymus exaggeraverit.
"Hippolytus also and Apollonius, senators of the city of Rome, composed works of their own." Jerome, Letter 70, to Magnus. But Remi Ceillier, in the Histoire générale des auteurs, vol. II, p. 316, in the notes to the first article, ch. 27, shrewdly observes that this is read so only in some editions; for in the ancient manuscripts which Mariano Vittori, the Italian prelate, used in his edition of the Works of St Jerome, on the testimony of the same French writer, instead of the word senatores ("senators") is read Senator ("a senator"), so that this rank is ascribed to Apollonius alone, to whom it certainly belongs, since St Jerome in the book On Illustrious Men, ch. 42, again ascribes the same rank to him, and in the same work, ch. 61, in the notice of St Hippolytus, makes no mention of that senatorial rank. The most distinguished Domenico Vallarsi also, the latest editor of the Works of St Jerome, vol. I, part I, p. 361, likewise notes that the Benedictine editors of the Works of St Jerome, following Erasmus, wrongly read: "Hippolytus also and Apollonius, senators of the city of Rome"; whereas it was said of Apollonius only, as is clear from the Catalogue; indeed, while some doubt, not only of Hippolytus but of Apollonius himself, whether he was ever a senator, or whether Jerome magnified it out of Eusebius by his own invention.
(printed under page 146)
(4) ‹anchor: Stephanum le Moyne› · call in col 271
Stephan. le Moyne Prolegomena ad Varia sacra, tom. I.
Étienne Le Moyne, Prolegomena to the Varia sacra, vol. I.
(printed under page 146)
(5) ‹anchor: Guil. Caveum› · call in col 271
Cave. Hist. litter., tom. I, 102.
Cave, Historia litteraria, vol. I, 102.
(printed under page 146)
(6) ‹anchor: Jac. Basnage› · call in col 271
Jac. Basnage Canisii Lect. antiq., tom. I, p 3, 4.
Jacques Basnage, Canisius's Lectiones antiquae, vol. I, pp. 3, 4.
(printed under page 146)
Page
- running head: 271 DE VITA ET SCRIP
- marginal letters: (none)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; full-width headings at top (P. GOTTFRI... / DISSE... / DE VITA ET SCRIPTI... / (Historia critica SS. Patrum, t. VI... / CAPUT ... / HISTORIA VITAE S...) cut off at right edge, not set; editors' matter: ARTICULUS I. (Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: Ro-[manum]
fuisse; huicque sententiae favere videtur illud Hieronymi in epistola ad Magnum, eumdem senatorem Romanum appellantis. Novissime auctores Historiae litterariae Galliae e congregatione S. Mauri Hippolytum inter scriptores Gallos referunt, ei Galliarum regnum natale solum statuentes. Huicque opinioni haud obstare observant nomen suum, quod Graecum est, nec quod Graece scripserit, neque denique dignitas senatoris Romani. Non primum, ac secundum, quoniam constet, non paucis nomina propria Graeca in Galliis communia fuisse, atque plures Latio non tantum, sed et in Gallia natos lingua Graeca libros composuisse. Non denique tertium; quia Gallis jam a tempore imperii Claudii, et multo ante ad senatoriam dignitatem patebat aditus. Ut nihil dicam, quod senatoria S. Hippolyti dignitas sit admodum dubia, si non penitus falsa.
and that saying of Jerome in the epistle to Magnus, calling the same man a Roman senator, seems to favour this opinion. Most recently the authors of the Literary History of France from the Congregation of St Maur reckon Hippolytus among Gallic writers, assigning the kingdom of the Gauls to him as his native soil. And they observe that neither his name, which is Greek, nor the fact that he wrote in Greek, nor finally the dignity of a Roman senator stands in the way of this opinion. Not the first and the second, since it is established that Greek proper names were common to not a few in the Gauls, and that several born not only in Latium, but also in Gaul composed books in the Greek language. Nor finally the third, because to the Gauls already from the time of the reign of Claudius, and much earlier, access to senatorial dignity lay open. To say nothing of the fact that the senatorial dignity of St Hippolytus is very doubtful, if not wholly false.
S. Irenaei discipulus fuit Hippolytus, ut ipsemet testatur apud Photium. Hinc mitius accipiendi Palladius et Cyrillus Scythopolitanus, qui eum γνώριμον τῶν ἀποστόλων, apostolorum familiarem fuisse tradiderunt. Ipsum namque sub Alexandro imperatore, qui regnare coepit anno Christi
Hippolytus was a disciple of St Irenaeus, as he himself testifies in Photius. Hence Palladius and Cyril of Scythopolis are to be taken more mildly, who handed down that he was an acquaintance of the apostles, a familiar friend of the apostles. For that he himself under the Emperor Alexander, who began to reign in the year of Christ
Editors' notes and page, col. 272
Footnotes
(7) ‹anchor: natale solum statuentes› · call in col 272
Histoire littéraire de la France, tom. I, parte I, pag. 361.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, part I, p. 361.
(printed under page 146)
(8) ‹anchor: testatur apud Photium› · call in col 272
Phot., cod. CXXI Biblioth.
Photius, Bibliotheca, codex 121.
(printed under page 146)
(9) ‹anchor: mitius accipiendi Palladius› · call in col 272
Pallad., Hist. Lausiac., cap. 148.
Palladius, Lausiac History, ch. 148.
(printed under page 146)
(10) ‹anchor: Cyrillus Scythopolitanus› · call in col 272
Cyrill. Scyth. Vit. S. Euthym. in Analect. Graec. B. B., pag. 82, et Vita S. Sabae in Monument. Eccles. Graec. Coteler., tom. III, pag. 354.
Cyril of Scythopolis, Life of St Euthymius, in the Analecta Graeca of the Benedictines, p. 82, and Life of St Sabas, in Cotelier's Ecclesiae Graecae monumenta, vol. III, p. 354.
(printed under page 146)
Page
- running head: VITA ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 272
- marginal letters: A manum fuisse; B patebat aditus.; C (4) Stephan. le Moyne
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; full-width headings at top (...TTFRIDI LUMPER / DISSERTATIO / ...SCRIPTIS SANCTI HIPPOLYTI. / ...SS. Patrum, t. VIII, Augustae Vindelic., 1791, in-8°.) / CAPUT PRIMUM. / ...ORIA VITAE SANCTI HIPPOLYTI.) cut off at left edge, not set; editors' matter: manum fuisse (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [Ro]manum
222, vitam duxisse, ex ejus Canone Paschali compertum fit. Plurimum autem profecisse in omni scientiarum genere tanto sub magistro Hippolytum, quae superant, ejus doctrinae monumenta luculenter evincunt; ut propterea vir disertissimus ab Hieronymo, quinetiam sacratissimus et magnus doctor, veritatisque testis fidelis ab Anastasio atque Ecclesiae doctor γλυκύτατος καὶ εὐνούστατος, dulcissimus, et benignissimus ab alio antiquo scriptore jure appelletur. Ad haec teste D. Hieronymo non solum magnam dicendi vim sub disciplina S. Irenaei, sed immensam quoque in philosophia et profanis scientiis notitiam sibi comparavit; ea enim aetate summi in Ecclesia viri, quemadmodum nemo ignorat, hujus generis eruditionem vero theologo nequaquam velut indignam traduxerunt. Quod autem sacratiores litteras spectat, ingens scriptorum, quae hoc in genere elaboraverat, numerus, abunde confirmat, quam excellenter in iis versatus fuerit. Diversa insuper opera, quae pro inveniendo ac determinando Paschatis die composuerat, eumdem doctrinam temporum perfecte calluisse, luculenter demonstrant.
222, led his life, is ascertained from his Paschal Canon. Moreover, that Hippolytus made very great progress in every kind of science under so great a master, the monuments of his learning which remain clearly prove; so that on that account he is rightly called a most eloquent man by Jerome, nay even a most sacred and great doctor, and a faithful witness of the truth by Anastasius, and a most sweet and most benevolent doctor of the Church, most sweet and most benevolent, by another ancient writer. In addition to these things, as St Jerome testifies, he acquired for himself under the instruction of St Irenaeus not only great power of speaking, but also immense knowledge in philosophy and profane sciences; for in that age the greatest men in the Church, as no one is ignorant, by no means regarded erudition of this kind as unworthy of a true theologian. And as regards more sacred letters, the vast number of writings which he had elaborated in this kind abundantly confirms how excellently he was versed in them. Diverse works, moreover, which he had composed for finding and determining the day of Pascha, clearly demonstrate that the same man was thoroughly skilled in the science of chronology.
Aubertus Miraeus refert Hippolytum nostrum inter discipulos Clementis Alexandrini, et Baronius dicit se legisse quod discipulus fuerit Clementis Alexandrini, ejusque persuasione se Romam contulerit. Sed haud addunt, qua auctoritate innixi id tradant. Ulterius adhuc progressus est perdoctus Georgius Bullus, qui scribere non dubitavit: Quod magno consensu tradiderint scriptores ecclesiastici veteres, Hippolytum fuisse Clementis Alexandrini discipulum. Verum cum nulla antiquorum loca excitet, potior nobis est Photii auctoritas pro unico praeceptore, S. Irenaeo scilicet, testantis.
Aubert Le Mire reckons our Hippolytus among the disciples of Clement of Alexandria, and Baronius says that he read that he was a disciple of Clement of Alexandria, and by his persuasion betook himself to Rome. But they do not add on what authority they rely in handing this down. Still further proceeded the very learned George Bull, who did not hesitate to write: That with great consensus the ancient ecclesiastical writers handed down that Hippolytus was a disciple of Clement of Alexandria. But since he cites no passages of the ancients, preferable to us is the authority of Photius, testifying for a single teacher, namely St Irenaeus.
Cum apud eumdem Photium etiam legimus S. Hippolytum Origenis familiarem fuisse, hoc et aliorum suffragiis confirmari posse videtur. Hieronymus enim et Nicephorus scribunt, Hippolytum, Origene praesente, orationem sacram de laudibus Jesu Christi habuisse. Ille addit Ambrosium ad sacrorum librorum interpretationem Origenem incitasse, in aemulationem Hippolyti, editis jam in divinas Scripturas commentariis bene meriti. Monent autem Henricus Valesius et Petrus Daniel Huetius, Hieronymum Eusebii verba minus recte intellexisse, et vocem ἐκείνου, quae apud istum ad tempus pertineat, perperam ad Hippolytum retulisse. At
When we also read in the same Photius that St Hippolytus was a familiar friend of Origen, this seems able to be confirmed by the testimonies of others as well. For Jerome and Nicephorus write that Hippolytus, when Origen was present, delivered a sacred oration on the praises of Jesus Christ. The former adds that Ambrose urged Origen to the interpretation of the sacred books in emulation of Hippolytus, who had already deserved well by the commentaries he had published on the divine Scriptures. However, Henri de Valois and Pierre-Daniel Huet warn that Jerome understood the words of Eusebius less rightly, and wrongly referred the word ἐκείνου, which in him pertains to time, to Hippolytus. Yet
Editors' notes and page, col. 273
Footnotes
(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 273
Hieron. epist. 1, 2, ad Lucin.
Jerome, letter 1, 2, to Lucinius.
(printed under page 147)
(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 273
Anastas. in Collectan. apud Galland., tom. II Biblioth. PP., p. 469.
Anastasius, in the Collectanea, in Gallandi, vol. II of the Bibliotheca veterum Patrum, p. 469.
(printed under page 147)
(13) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 273
Anonym. inter Opp. S. Joan. Chrysost. in append. tom. VIII, pag. 79 noviss. edit.
Anonymous, among the Works of St John Chrysostom, in the appendix to vol. VIII, p. 79 of the latest edition.
(printed under page 147)
(14) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 273
Hieronym. ep. ad Lucin. 71, et ad Magn. 70.
Jerome, letter to Lucinius, 71, and to Magnus, 70.
(printed under page 147)
(15) ‹anchor: luculenter demonstrant› · call in col 273
Euseb. H. E. lib. V, cap. 22, Hieronym. in Catalog. cap. 61.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book V, ch. 22; Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 147)
(16) ‹anchor: Aubertus Miraeus› · call in col 273
Aubert. Mir. Not. ad Hieron. De vir. illustr., c. e.
Aubert Le Mire, Notes on Jerome, On Illustrious Men, same chapter.
(printed under page 147)
(17) ‹anchor: et Baronius› · call in col 273
Baron. ad ann. 229, num. 4.
Baronius, at the year 229, no. 4.
(printed under page 147)
(18) ‹anchor: scribere non dubitavit› · call in col 273
Bull. Defens. fid. Nicaen., sec. III, cap. 8, p. 220.
Bull, Defence of the Nicene Faith, section III, ch. 8, p. 220.
(printed under page 147)
(19) ‹anchor: Hieronymus enim› · call in col 273
Hieron. loc. cit. Eus. H. E. l. VI, cap. 23.
Jerome, at the place cited; Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book VI, ch. 23.
(printed under page 147)
(20) ‹anchor: et Nicephorus› · call in col 273
Niceph., H. E. lib. IV, cap. 31, tom. I, pag. 330.
Nicephorus, Ecclesiastical History, book IV, ch. 31, vol. I, p. 330.
(printed under page 147)
(21) ‹anchor: Henricus Valesius› · call in col 273
Vales., Not. in Euseb. lib. VI H. E., c. 23.
Valois, Notes on Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 23.
(printed under page 147)
(22) ‹anchor: Petrus Daniel Huetius› · call in col 273
Huet. Origenian. lib. I, cap. 2, § 8.
Huet, Origeniana, book I, ch. 2, § 8.
(printed under page 147)
Page
- running head: 273 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A 222, vitam duxisse; B tionem vero theologo; C ctus Georgius Bullus; D nas Scripturas commentariis
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: 222, vitam duxisse (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
doctissimus Stephanus le Moyne observat, quod revera ἐξ ἐκείνου possit etiam referri ad Hippolytum, et sive ad tempus referatur, intelligendum sit, Origenem isto tempore imitatione Hippolyti, de quo ante egerat Eusebius, commentarios etiam in sacram Scripturam parasse et adornasse. Audiendus quoque est recentissimus auctor, qui hac de re ita disserit: Omnia suadent vera esse, quaecunque veteres de Origenis aemulatione tradiderunt, Ambrosio excitante, qui studia ipsi proponeret Hippolyti... Utriusque autem consensio tum quoque firmari potest, cum Origenes Romam adveniens, pontifice Zephyrino, circiter annum 220, non modo privatim, at publice etiam Hippolytum disserentem audivit, ejusque rei testimonium Hippolytus ipse reliquit in oratione, quam de laude D. Salvatoris habuit, quamque προσομιλίαν denominavit. Quod enim non nemo subdit, in Oriente id contigisse, minime est necessarium, quamvis fieri potuerit, cum Hippolytus Alexandriam petiit, indeque rediens epistolam ad Romanos ab Dionysio episcopo Alexandrino attulit. Neque vero est, cur alterum Hippolytum effingamus, quo tempore noster Portuensis Alexandriam remeare potuit, ubi adolescens institutus fuisse videtur ex Canone Paschali, cujus rationem Alexandrini sibi vindicabant.
the most learned Stephen Le Moyne observes that in fact ἐξ ἐκείνου can also be referred to Hippolytus, and even if it be referred to time, it must be understood that Origen at that time, in imitation of Hippolytus, of whom Eusebius had treated before, also prepared and adorned commentaries on sacred Scripture. Worthy of a hearing also is a very recent author, who discourses thus concerning this matter: All things persuade us that whatsoever the ancients handed down concerning the emulation of Origen is true, with Ambrose urging him on and proposing to him the studies of Hippolytus... Moreover, the harmony of both can be confirmed at that time also, when Origen, arriving at Rome under the pontiff Zephyrinus about the year 220, heard Hippolytus discoursing not only privately, but also publicly, and of that fact Hippolytus himself left testimony in the oration which he delivered on the praise of the Lord and Saviour, and which he termed a προσομιλία. For what someone subjoins, that this happened in the East, is by no means necessary, although it could have happened when Hippolytus went to Alexandria, and returning thence brought an epistle to the Romans from Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria. Nor indeed is there any reason why we should fashion another Hippolytus, at a time when our bishop of Portus could have returned to Alexandria, where as a young man he seems to have been educated, as appears from the Paschal Canon, the method of which the Alexandrians claimed for themselves.
De tempore quo Hippolytus floruit, sententiae auctorum itidem discrepantes sunt. Eusebius, Hieronymus, Syncellus, atque alii referunt eum ad Alexandri Severi imperium, qui anno Servatoris nostri 222 regnare coepit. In Euthymii Vita antiquus ipsisque apostolis familiaris dicitur, idemque in Cyrilli Scythopolitani Vita S. Sabae de eo habetur, quod, quemadmodum paulo superius animadvertimus, non simpliciter intelligi potest. Longe enim remotus fuit ab apostolorum ipsorum aetate. Stephanus le Moyne loc. cit. existimat Hippolytum, Philippi Arabis, qui anno Christi 254 imperatoris dignitatem est consecutus, tempus attigisse, quod ubi admittamus, dicendum est eum admodum aetate profectum fuisse. Nec martyrium illius apte convenit temporibus Philippi, uti ex paulo post tradendis patebit. Id dubio caret, eum imperante Alexandro Severo vixisse et scripsisse; temporis autem ratio non accurate definiri potest.
Concerning the time at which Hippolytus flourished, the opinions of authors are likewise at variance. Eusebius, Jerome, Syncellus, and others refer him to the reign of Alexander Severus, who began to reign in the year of our Saviour 222. In the Life of Euthymius he is called ancient and a familiar friend to the apostles themselves, and the same is found concerning him in Cyril of Scythopolis's Life of St Sabas, which, as we noticed a little above, cannot be understood simply. For he was far removed from the age of the apostles themselves. Stephen Le Moyne in the place cited considers that Hippolytus reached the time of Philip the Arab, who attained the dignity of emperor in the year of Christ 254; which if we admit, it must be said that he was very far advanced in age. Nor does his martyrdom aptly suit the times of Philip, as will be clear from what is to be handed down a little later. This is beyond doubt, that he lived and wrote while Alexander Severus was emperor; but the exact reckoning of the time cannot be accurately defined.
ARTICULUS II.
ARTICLE II.
DE SEDE EPISCOPALI S. HIPPOLYTI.
ON THE EPISCOPAL SEE OF ST HIPPOLYTUS.
Charactere episcopali S. Hippolytum nostrum fuisse insignitum perhibent Eusebius atque D. Hieronymus: sed incerta omnino est ejus
Eusebius and St Jerome relate that our St Hippolytus was distinguished with the episcopal character: but wholly uncertain is his
Editors' notes and page, col. 274
Footnotes
(23) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 274
Moyne, Prolegomena ad Varia Sacra, in exercitatiuncula de S. Hippolyto.
Le Moyne, Prolegomena to the Varia sacra, in the short essay on St Hippolytus.
(printed under page 147)
(24) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 274
Simon de Magistris, in Praefat. ad Danielem secundum LXX, num. VII, p. XXVI, edit. Roman. 1772.
Simone de Magistris, in the Preface to Daniel according to the Seventy, no. VII, p. xxvi, Roman edition of 1772.
(printed under page 147)
(25) ‹anchor: perhibent Eusebius› · call in col 274
Euseb., H. E. lib. VI, cap. 20.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book VI, ch. 20.
(printed under page 147)
(26) ‹anchor: D. Hieronymus› · call in col 274
Hieron. De vir. ill. cap. 61.
Jerome, On Illustrious Men, ch. 61.
(printed under page 147)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 274
- marginal letters: A doctissimus Stephanus; B tione, quam de; C quus ipsisque apostolis; D ARTICULUS II.
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: doctissimus Stephanus le Moyne (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
sedes, an episcopus gentium putandus, quo quidem titulo ejus sodalem Caium Romanae Ecclesiae presbyterum ornatum fuisse probe novimus? Operae pretium est ire per singula, quae hac de re doctissimi excussis veterum libris excogitarunt.
see, or whether he is to be considered a bishop of the nations, with which title indeed we well know his companion Caius, presbyter of the Roman Church, to have been adorned. It is worthwhile to go through the individual opinions which the most learned men have devised concerning this matter after examining the books of the ancients.
Eusebius Caesariensis de episcopatu S. Hippolyti sic scribit: Eadem tempestate multi ecclesiastici viri doctrina excellentes florebant... Inter hos fuit Beryllus Bostrenorum in Arabia episcopus, qui praeter epistolas et lucubrationes varia quoque elegantis ingenii monumenta dereliquit. Similiter et Hippolytus alterius cujusdam Ecclesiae episcopus. Sanctus vero Hieronymus videtur locum episcopatus ejus indagasse et non invenisse, quemadmodum in opere De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis, cap. 61, innuit his verbis: Hippolytus cujusdam Ecclesiae episcopus (nomen quippe urbis scire non potui). Theodoretus autem, qui multa ex eo adducit, episcopum et martyrem illum vocat; sed cujusnam urbis episcopus fuerit, non addit.
Eusebius of Caesarea writes thus concerning the episcopate of St Hippolytus: At the same period many ecclesiastical men excelling in learning flourished... Among these was Beryllus, bishop of the Bostrenes in Arabia, who besides epistles and treatises left behind also various monuments of an elegant genius. Similarly also Hippolytus, bishop of a certain other Church. Moreover, St Jerome seems to have investigated the place of his episcopate and not to have found it, just as in his work On Ecclesiastical Writers, chap. 61, he intimates in these words: Hippolytus, bishop of a certain Church (for I have not been able to know the name of the city). And Theodoret, who adduces many things from him, calls him bishop and martyr; but of what city he was bishop, he does not add.
Primus fuit Gelasius I pontifex, seu potius Gelasius Cyzicenus, ut Bellarminus et alii viri docti malunt (uterque saeculo V floruit), in opusculo de duabus in Christo naturis contra Nestorium et Eutychen, qui sedem Hippolyti nostri sub metropoli Arabica collocavit. Verum haec sententia nulli alii fundamento nititur, nisi perversae Rufini loci Eusebiani interpretationi. Rufinus enim vertit: Erat inter caeteros et Beryllus scriptorum praecipuus, qui et ipse diversa opuscula dereliquit. Episcopus hic fuit apud Bostram, Arabiae urbem maximam. Erat nihilominus et Hippolytus, qui et ipse aliquanta scripta dereliquit, episcopus. Graeca siquidem Eusebii nil aliud innuunt verba, quam quod Beryllus Bostrenorum in Arabia episcopus fuerit, atque similiter Hippolytus alterius cujusdam Ecclesiae episcopus. Ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ Ἱππόλυτος ἑτέρας που καὶ αὐτὸς προεστὼς Ἐκκλησίας. En, quomodo prima haec atque antiquissima opinio per ipsum Eusebium, cujus auctoritati suffulta credebatur, labefactetur?
The first was the pontiff Gelasius I, or rather Gelasius of Cyzicus, as Bellarmine and other learned men prefer (each flourished in the fifth century), in his tractate on the two natures in Christ against Nestorius and Eutyches, who placed the see of our Hippolytus under the Arabian metropolis. But this opinion rests on no other foundation than Rufinus's perverse interpretation of the passage of Eusebius. For Rufinus translates: There was among the rest also Beryllus, chief of the writers, who himself also left behind diverse short works. This man was bishop at Bostra, the greatest city of Arabia. There was nonetheless also Hippolytus, a bishop, who himself also left behind a good many writings. Since indeed the Greek words of Eusebius intimate nothing else than that Beryllus was bishop of the Bostrenes in Arabia, and similarly Hippolytus was bishop of a certain other Church: And in like manner also Hippolytus, himself also presiding over some other Church. Behold how this first and most ancient opinion is shaken by Eusebius himself, by whose authority it was believed to be supported!
Zonaras et Nicephorus quos plerique recentiores sequuntur, eum Portus Romani episcopum fuisse scribunt. Leontius Byzantinus tradit illum Romae munus episcopi gessisse. Centuriatores Magdeburgenses appellant eum Ostiensem antistitem. Quidam volunt S. Hippolytum fuisse Portuensem seu Adamensem in Arabia episcopum, et hoc quidem nonnullis ita visum est, ut se nunc
Zonaras and Nicephorus, whom most modern writers follow, write that he was bishop of Portus Romanus. Leontius of Byzantium hands down that he held the office of bishop at Rome. The Magdeburg Centuriators call him bishop of Ostia. Some will have it that St Hippolytus was bishop of Portus or Adana in Arabia, and this indeed has so seemed to some that they have persuaded themselves that now
Editors' notes and page, col. 275
Footnotes
(27) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 275
Euseb., lib. c.
Eusebius, book and chapter as cited.
(printed under page 148)
(28) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 275
Theodoret., Dialog. I, pag. 2, 3, 36; Dialog. II, pag. 88; Dialog. III, pag. 154.
Theodoret, Dialogue I, pp. 2, 3, 36; Dialogue II, p. 88; Dialogue III, p. 154.
(printed under page 148)
(29) ‹anchor: Arabica collocavit› · call in col 275
Hippolyti episcopi martyris Arabum metropolis in Memoria haeresium. Gelas. tom. IV Biblioth. PP., pag. 424.
"Of Hippolytus, bishop and martyr of the metropolis of the Arabs, in the Memorial of Heresies." Gelasius, vol. IV of the Bibliotheca Patrum, p. 424.
(printed under page 148)
(30) ‹anchor: Zonaras et Nicephorus› · call in col 275
Zonar., tom. II Annal., et Nicephor. H. E. lib. IV, cap. 31.
Zonaras, Annals vol. II, and Nicephorus, Ecclesiastical History, book IV, ch. 31.
(printed under page 148)
(31) ‹anchor: Leontius Byzantinus› · call in col 275
Leont. Byzant., lect. III de sectis, pag. 430: «Forte Romanus dictus fuit episcopus eo sensu, quo significatur Latinus episcopus. In Graecorum enim lingua hi termini Romanus et Latinus synonyma sunt.»
Leontius of Byzantium, On the Sects, lecture III, p. 430: "Perhaps he was called a Roman bishop in the sense in which a Latin bishop is meant. For in the language of the Greeks these terms, Roman and Latin, are synonyms."
(printed under page 148)
(32) ‹anchor: Ostiensem antistitem› · call in col 275
Centuriat. Magdeb., cent. 3, c. 10, p. 191.
The Magdeburg Centuriators, century 3, ch. 10, p. 191.
(printed under page 148)
Page
- running head: 275 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A sedes, an episcopus; B his verbis: Hippolytus; C qui et ipse; D Magdeburgenses appellant
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek quote from Eusebius); editors' matter: sedes, an episcopus gentium (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
accuratiore cognitione rem assequi posse, sibi persuaserint. Stephanus enim le Moyne existimat Hippolytum Portus Romani, emporii in Arabia celeberrimi, Adenae etiam dicti, et a Romanis mercatoribus admodum frequentati, episcopatum gessisse; quae sententia aliis quoque doctissimis viris, atque in his Guil. Caveo, Casimiro Oudino et Ell. Dupinio se commendavit. Eruditissimus insuper Jos. Simonius Assemanus Maronita huic opinioni subscribit, dum tom. III Biblioth. Orient. Clementino-Vaticanae part. I, cap. 7, pag. 15, post enumeratas quasdam sancti martyris nostri elucubrationes ita in notis monet: Hippolytus, Portus Romani, non ad ostia Tiberina, sed celeberrimi in Arabia hoc nomine emporii episcopus, ut Stephanus le Moyne conjicit. Abulidum Romae episcopum vocant recentiores Christiani Arabes. Sed haec Moynii conjectura magis ingeniosa quam verosimilis est. Siquidem nullibi legitur, quod ille Portus Romanus primis saeculis episcopali sede exornatus fuerit. Si tamen S. Hippolytus unquam fuerit episcopus urbis Adanensis, profecto mirum omnibus videbitur, Eusebium Arabiae vicinum, et S. Hieronymum Romae, et in Oriente diu versatum non novisse cathedram episcopalem hujus sancti viri, sive celeberrimum Arabiae emporium, quod a Romanis passim frequentabatur. Igitur undique involvimur tenebris, quas sine clariore luce dissipare non possumus, et ideo ad opiniones aliorum referendas progredimur.
by more accurate knowledge they can attain the truth of the matter. For Stephen Le Moyne considers that Hippolytus held the episcopate of Portus Romanus, a most celebrated emporium in Arabia, also called Adena, and very much frequented by Roman merchants; which opinion has commended itself to other most learned men as well, and among these to William Cave, Casimir Oudin, and Louis Ellies Dupin. Moreover, the most learned Maronite Joseph Simon Assemani subscribes to this opinion, while in vol. 3 of the Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, part 1, chap. 7, p. 15, after enumerating certain works of our holy martyr, he remarks thus in the notes: Hippolytus, bishop of Portus Romanus, not at the mouths of the Tiber, but of the most celebrated emporium of this name in Arabia, as Stephen Le Moyne conjectures. More recent Christian Arabs call him Abulides, bishop of Rome. But this conjecture of Le Moyne is more ingenious than probable. Since indeed it is read nowhere that that Portus Romanus was adorned with an episcopal see in the first centuries. Yet if St Hippolytus was ever bishop of the city of Adana, it will assuredly seem wonderful to all that Eusebius, a neighbour of Arabia, and St Jerome, who lived long at Rome and in the East, did not know the episcopal chair of this holy man, or the most celebrated emporium of Arabia, which was everywhere frequented by the Romans. Therefore on all sides we are wrapped in darkness, which we cannot dispel without clearer light, and accordingly we proceed to report the opinions of others.
Tillemontius haud contemnendam conjecturam esse observat, si dicatur Hippolytum in parva quadam urbe, cujus nomen minus notum sit, sacris praefuisse; venditatum autem esse episcopum Portus Romani, quoniam eo in loco martyr hoc nomine celebris exstiterit, ex Oriente fortasse illuc delatus, quem interjecto tempore, cum magno Hippolyto episcopo et martyre confuderint. Utroque pollice huic conjecturae subscribit perdoctus Ceillierius.
Tillemont observes that it is a conjecture by no means to be despised if it be said that Hippolytus presided over sacred things in a certain small city whose name is less known, but was given out to be bishop of Portus Romanus because in that place there was a famous martyr of this name, perhaps brought thither from the East, whom after an interval of time men confused with the great Hippolytus, bishop and martyr. With both thumbs the very learned Ceillier subscribes to this conjecture.
Bollandiani de sede Hippolyti M. ita conjectant: Ex antiquis (inquiunt) Martyrologiis primo constat S. Hippolytum hac die (22 Aug.) vel sequente in Portu Romano martyrium subiisse. Praeterea ex Eusebio aliisque vetustis scriptoribus liquet hunc martyrem episcopali dignitate praeditum fuisse. Denique S. Hieronymus in opere De scriptor. eccles., cap. 61, testatur, S. Hippolytum habuisse homiliam
The Bollandists conjecture thus concerning the see of Hippolytus the Martyr: From the ancient Martyrologies (they say) it is established first that St Hippolytus underwent martyrdom on this day (22 Aug.) or the following in Portus Romanus. Furthermore, from Eusebius and other ancient writers it is clear that this martyr was endowed with episcopal dignity. Finally, St Jerome in his work On Ecclesiastical Writers, chap. 61, testifies that St Hippolytus delivered a homily
Editors' notes and page, col. 276
Footnotes
(33) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 276
Steph. le Moyne, Prolegom. ad Varia Sacra.
Étienne Le Moyne, Prolegomena to the Varia sacra.
(printed under page 148)
(34) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 276
Cave. Hist. litter. tom. I, p. 102; Oudin., Commentar. de script. eccles. tom. I, pag. 222; Dupin, Biblioth. auctor. tom. I, pag. 179, in not. vers. Latin.
Cave, Historia litteraria, vol. I, p. 102; Oudin, Commentarius de scriptoribus ecclesiae, vol. I, p. 222; Dupin, Bibliothèque des auteurs, vol. I, p. 179, in the notes to the Latin version.
(printed under page 148)
(35) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 276
De episcopatibus Arabiae consuli potest Carolus a S. Paulo in Geographia sacra p. 295, ubi etiam de metropoli Bostrensi. Philostorg. in H. E. lib. III, cap. 4.
On the bishoprics of Arabia one may consult Charles of St Paul in the Geographia sacra, p. 295, where he also treats of the metropolis of Bostra. Philostorgius, in the Ecclesiastical History, book III, ch. 4.
(printed under page 148)
(36) ‹anchor: esse observat› · call in col 276
Tillemont, Mémoir. tom. III, art.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, article [number not printed].
(printed under page 148)
(37) ‹anchor: perdoctus Ceillierius› · call in col 276
Ceillier, Hist. génér. tom. II, pag. 317.
Ceillier, Histoire générale, vol. II, p. 317.
(printed under page 148)
(38) ‹anchor: (inquiunt)› · call in col 276
Bolland., tom. IV August., pag. 510.
The Bollandists, Acta Sanctorum, August vol. IV, p. 510.
(printed under page 148)
Page
- running head: SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 276
- marginal letters: A accuratiore cognitione; B conjicit. Abulidum; C progredimur.; D Eusebio aliisque
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: accuratiore cognitione (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
de laude Domini Salvatoris, in qua praesente Origene se loqui in ecclesia significat. Hinc videtur fuisse episcopus in Oriente, et forsan in Arabia, ad quam Origenes anno circiter 217 evocatus est, ut apud Eusebium H. E. lib. IV, cap. 19, legimus. His ita positis, nonne S. Hippolytus episcopus Arabs facile potuit ad visitanda apostolorum aliorumque martyrum sepulcra Romam venire, in Portu Romano ab ethnicis comprehendi, et ibidem martyrio affici? Quid si plebs, determinatam istius martyris cathedram ignorans, hunc peregrinum episcopum a loco martyrii Portuensem cognominaverit, et hic popularis error ad aliquos posterioris aevi scriptores transierit, vel potius illa appellatio posteris occasionem dederit, ad Portuensem hujus martyris episcopatum asserendum? Quidquid sit de hac conjectura nostra, quam propter certiora cujuslibet argumenta libenter deseremus, nos in titulo martyrium S. Hippolyti cum vetustis ac recentioribus Martyrologiis in Portu Romano collocamus... Addunt adhuc, quod non inviti Orientalem et Occidentalem hujus sancti martyris episcopatum cum Baronio et Ughello admittant, et hoc ultimum systema suum pro mera conjectura dent.
on the praise of the Lord and Saviour, in which he signifies that he is speaking in the church with Origen present. Hence he seems to have been a bishop in the East, and perhaps in Arabia, to which Origen was summoned about the year 217, as we read in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book 4, chap. 19. These things being so laid down, could not St Hippolytus, an Arabian bishop, easily have come to Rome to visit the tombs of the apostles and other martyrs, been arrested by the pagans in Portus Romanus, and suffered martyrdom in the same place? What if the common people, ignorant of the fixed chair of that martyr, surnamed this foreign bishop "of Portus" from the place of his martyrdom, and this popular error passed over to some writers of a later age, or rather that appellation gave occasion to posterity for asserting the episcopate of Portus for this martyr? Whatever be the case with this conjecture of ours, which we shall gladly abandon on account of surer arguments from anyone, in our title we place the martyrdom of St Hippolytus, with the ancient and more recent Martyrologies, in Portus Romanus... They add further that not unwillingly they admit both an Eastern and a Western episcopate of this holy martyr with Baronius and Ughelli, and offer this last system of theirs as a mere conjecture.
Auctores Historiae litterariae Galliarum regni censent S. Hippolytum martyrem nullam habuisse fixam sedem, sed quemadmodum ejus sodalis Caius, gentium, sive nationum fuisse episcopum. Sic autem ratiocinantur: Quando Eusebius Hippolytum dicit alterius cujusdam Ecclesiae, utut indeterminatae, episcopum, lubenti animo credimus, eumdem non habuisse fixam sedem, sed putandum esse, sicut condiscipulum suum Caium, nationum episcopum. Haec profecto opinio simplicissima absque controversia nobis videtur, atque cum sancti nostri historia apprime conspirat. Hoc enim posito, haud amplius in ratione reddenda sumus anxii, cur sanctus Hippolytus modo in Oriente, modo in Occidente, quemadmodum ex paucis ejus gestis, quae ad nostram notitiam pervenerunt, constat, apparuerit. Quod autem in Oriente versatus fuerit, ex hoc nullus dubitandi locus relinquitur, quia ipse suis in operibus asseverat Origenem in numero suorum auditorum fuisse, quod sane in Occidente accidere haud potuit. Neque etiam in dubium revocari potest quin etiam, postquam Lugdunensem Ecclesiam reliquerat, in Occidente commoratus fuerit. Hujus rei confirmandae argumentum omni exceptione majus illud est, quod in computum temporum morem Latinorum sequatur, posthabito illo Alexandrinorum, quo omnes Orientales utebantur.
The authors of the Literary History of the Kingdom of the Gauls judge that St Hippolytus the martyr had no fixed see, but just like his companion Caius, was a bishop of the Gentiles, or of the nations. And they reason thus: Since Eusebius calls Hippolytus bishop of a certain other Church, albeit undetermined, we gladly believe that the same man did not have a fixed see, but is to be considered, just like his fellow-disciple Caius, a bishop of the nations. This opinion assuredly seems to us the simplest without controversy, and agrees exceedingly well with the history of our saint. For when this is laid down, we are no longer anxious in giving an account why St Hippolytus appeared now in the East, now in the West, just as is established from the few deeds of his which have come to our knowledge. And that he lived in the East, from this no room for doubting is left, because he himself in his works asserts that Origen was in the number of his hearers, which certainly could not have happened in the West. Nor also can it be called into doubt that even after he had left the Church of Lyons, he dwelt in the West. An argument beyond all exception for confirming this fact is that in the computation of times he follows the custom of the Latins, setting aside that of the Alexandrians, which all the Easterns used.
Ab omnibus his sententiis, sive conjecturis discedit vir longe doctissimus, Christophorus Augustus
From all these opinions or conjectures departs a by far most learned man, Christoph August
Editors' notes and page, col. 277
Footnotes
(39) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 277
Baron., ad ann. 229, num. IV. Ughell., Ital. Sacr. tom. I, col. 110, nov. edit.
Baronius, at the year 229, no. IV. Ughelli, Italia sacra, vol. I, col. 110, new edition.
(printed under page 149)
(40) ‹anchor: nationum fuisse episcopum› · call in col 277
Benedictini e congregat. S. Mauri in Hist. littér. de la France, tom. I, part. I, pag. 363.
The Benedictines of the Congregation of St Maur, in the Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, part I, p. 363.
(printed under page 149)
Page
- running head: 277 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A de laude Domini; B Quidquid sit; C non habuisse; D vocari potest
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: de laude Domini Salvatoris (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: Augu-[stus]
Heumannus, ac nova ratione utitur, hanc rem difficilem explicandi. Nimirum vir eruditus, tota licet antiquitate repugnante, unius vocis variae acceptioni subnixus et fidens, comprobare nititur dissertatione anno 1738, Goettingae edita, Hippolytum fuisse quidem episcopum, non tamen ecclesiasticum, at civilem. Quam in sententiam paucula excitat loca ex Graecis Latinisque scriptoribus, unde colligat fuisse aliquando civilium munerum homines, qui appellarentur episcopi; idque nominis in primis orae maritimae atque adeo portuum custodibus fuisse tributum: ut proinde noster Hippolytus, ortu fortasse Romanus, eo sensu Romani portus episcopus censendus fuerit. Quin, si virum criticum audias, vel ipsa statua marmorea Hippolyto a propinquis posita, atque ex Romani portus ruderibus anno 1551 effossa, istiusmodi sententiam confirmat; quippe quae, ait, nullam plane notam ecclesiasticae dignitatis prae se ferat.
Heumann, and uses a new method of explaining this difficult matter. Namely, the learned man, although all antiquity opposes it, relying on and trusting in the varied acceptation of a single word, strives to prove in a dissertation published at Göttingen in the year 1738 that Hippolytus was indeed an episcopus, yet not an ecclesiastical, but a civil one. For which opinion he cites a very few passages from Greek and Latin writers, whence he gathers that there were sometimes men of civil offices who were called episcopi, and that this name was attributed especially to guards of the sea-coast and even of harbours; so that accordingly our Hippolytus, perhaps Roman by birth, was in that sense to be accounted overseer of the Roman harbour. Nay, if you listen to the critical man, even the marble statue itself erected to Hippolytus by his kinsfolk, and dug up from the ruins of the Roman harbour in the year 1551, confirms an opinion of this sort, inasmuch as it, says he, displays no mark at all of ecclesiastical dignity.
Perbelle sane. Nunc vero, si diis placet, inter Ecclesiae Patres, qui saeculo tertio ineunte floruerunt, novimus recensendum Hippolytum; virum haud Plinio absimilem, qui, ut ille portui Miseno, fuerit Romano praefectus; episcopus quidem, sed civilis; orae, inquam, maritimae inspector, curator, superintendens. Scilicet noster Hippolytus vir fuit magnae dignationis in urbe Roma, honoribus pariter ac divitiis eminens, Romanique portus praefectus; ut propterea, quo munere suo rite fungeretur, sublimiora Christianae religionis mysteria reserarit; de theologia et incarnatione, de Deo et carnis resurrectione peregerit; commentaria in omnes ferme sacras utriusque Foederis paginas ediderit; de apostolicis traditionibus scripserit; demonstrationem temporum Paschae elucubrarit; adversus Judaeos, ethnicos haereticosque stylum acuerit; qui praeterea de rebus divinis frequenter ad populum sermones habuerit; potissimum vero προσομιλίαν de laude Domini Salvatoris, in qua, praesente Origene, se loqui significat in ecclesia; cui denique non solum statua marmorea posita, sed statua in cathedra sedens; quo nimirum episcopalis ejus dignitas ecclesiastica, non civilis, ejusque munus ad Dei populum in Ecclesia dicendi testatum posteris relinqueretur. Quid absurdius dictu? Hinc Cl. Schroeckhius hanc Heumanni conjecturam satis ingeniose excogitatam ac exornatam quidem, sed haud verisimilem arbitratur.
Very finely indeed! Now truly, if it please the gods, among the Fathers of the Church who flourished at the beginning of the third century, we know that Hippolytus is to be reckoned, a man not unlike Pliny, who, as the latter was prefect of the harbour at Misenum, was prefect of the Roman harbour; an episcopus indeed, but civil; an inspector, I say, a curator, a superintendent of the sea-coast. Doubtless our Hippolytus was a man of great standing in the city of Rome, eminent alike in honours and in riches, and prefect of the Roman harbour; so that on that account, in order that he might duly discharge his office, he unlocked the more sublime mysteries of the Christian religion; treated thoroughly of theology and the incarnation, of God and the resurrection of the flesh; published commentaries on almost all the sacred pages of both Testaments; wrote concerning apostolic traditions; composed a demonstration of the times of Pascha; sharpened his pen against Jews, pagans, and heretics; who besides frequently delivered discourses on divine things to the people, and above all a προσομιλία on the praise of the Lord and Saviour, in which he signifies that he is speaking in the church with Origen present; to whom finally not only was a marble statue erected, but a statue sitting in a chair, whereby doubtless his ecclesiastical, not civil, episcopal dignity and his office of speaking to the people of God in the Church might be left attested to posterity. What could be more absurd to say? Hence the illustrious Schröckh judges this conjecture of Heumann to be ingeniously enough devised and embellished indeed, yet by no means probable.
Nostra aetate Romanus editor Danielis secundum Septuaginta ex Tetraplis Origenis demonstrare conatus est, quod S. Hippolytus non solum Portus Romani episcopus exstiterit, sed quod etiam ipsius dioecesis ad eam partem Romanae urbis, quae regio
In our age the Roman editor of Daniel according to the Septuagint from the Tetrapla of Origen has endeavoured to demonstrate that St Hippolytus was not only bishop of Portus Romanus, but also that his diocese extended to that part of the city of Rome which is called the
Editors' notes and page, col. 278
Footnotes
(41) ‹anchor: not visible (Christophorus Augustus Heumannus)› · call in col 278
Heumanni Dissertatio, in qua docetur ubi et qualis episcopus fuerit Hippolytus, saeculi tertii scriptor ecclesiasticus. Inter Primit. Gotting., pag. 2[?], et seq.
Heumann's dissertation, in which it is shown where and what kind of bishop Hippolytus, the third-century ecclesiastical writer, was. Among the Primitiae Gottingenses, p. 2[? remaining digits illegible on the scan], and following.
(printed under page 149)
(42) ‹anchor: haud Plinio absimilem› · call in col 278
Heumann. l. c. pag 245.
Heumann, at the place cited, p. 245.
(printed under page 149)
(43) ‹anchor: potissimum vero› · call in col 278
Hieronym. De Vir. illustr., cap. 61.
Jerome, On Illustrious Men, ch. 61.
(printed under page 149)
(44) ‹anchor: Cl. Schroeckhius› · call in col 278
Joan. Matth. Schroeckh., Christliche Geschichte, part. IV, pag. 155 secundae edit.
Johann Matthias Schröckh, Christliche Kirchengeschichte, part IV, p. 155 of the second edition.
(printed under page 149)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 278
- marginal letters: A stus Heumannus; B propinquis posita; C tur, sublimiora; D relinqueretur. Quid
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: stus Heumannus (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [Augu]stus
Transtiberina dicitur, se extenderit, atque ipsam Tiberinam insulam complexa fuerit. « Duo autem nobis post complures eruditorum sententias de titulo Hippolyti, quo dicitur ἐπίσκοπος Ῥώμης, quemadmodum saepe a Graecis, verisimilius dici posse visa sunt, quod ipse, cum esset gentium episcopus Romae ordinatus, fuerit in urbe Roma episcopus, unde percrebuit episcopus Romae, quod est alienum. Vixit Hippolyti aevo Caius presbyter, idemque Romae gentium episcopus, quemadmodum inferius apparebit, repudiata Jo. Alb. Fabricii emendatione, qui Athenarum loco gentium reposuit nullo jure, necessitate nulla; itemque Jac. Basnagii qui de Hippolyto loquens: Is enim ritus, inquit, plane novus, nec saltem pristinam, de qua agimus, antiquitatem redolet; nimirum quod episcopi aliquot sublevandis Romanorum pontificum curis praesto essent. Longius tamen aberravit Christophorus Aug. Heumannus qui civilem tantum episcopum, vel orae maritimae curatorem inspectoremque agnovit Hippolytum, ut martyri fortissimo semper vivo, mortuoque negotium fuerit cum errare volentibus. Eo itaque tempore quoniam Urbs innumerabili frequentia populi florebat, indeque Christianorum numerus augebatur in dies, pontifices Romani viros lectissimos, doctissimosque veluti adjutores adhibuerunt, quibus in Ecclesiae administratione uterentur, eosque in episcoporum gradu esse voluerunt. Succedit Ecclesiae Portuensis cura Hippolyto commissa, de qua Ecclesia nemo Eusebii Caesariensis, ac S. Hieronymi silentium vel ignorationem opponat, ut cathedram Hippolyti statuat ad Portum in Arabia. Facilius enim ambo scriptores de Portu Romano longe dissito silere potuerunt, quam de Portu Arabiae, quem propiorem habebant. Utque alia omittamus, Hippolyti statua singularis testis est, non Arabiae episcopum, sed hujus viciniae a se demonstrari; nam Cycli paschalis causa non statua opus erat, cui marmorea tabula suffecisset. Multo autem ipse Cyclus ostendit manifestius, auctorem non in Oriente, at in his ipsis vixisse nostris regionibus. Totus enim est Latinorum usui accommodatus; ab Orientalium vero consuetudine tam alienus, ut a viris eruditissimis, qui suppares fuerunt Hippolyto, atque in Oriente floruerunt, percipi non potuerit. S. Anatolius ipse Laodicenus hoc eodem studio celeberrimus: Hippolytus, inquit, 16 annorum circulum quibusdam ignotis lunae cursibus composuit. At sedem Hippolyti luculentius alii vindicarunt, praecipueque Constantinus Ruggerius V. C., cujus inspeximus pagellas 80 hoc argumento conscriptas, easque nuper in dissertationem erudite absolutam
Transtiberine region, and embraced the Tiber Island itself. "Moreover, after very many opinions of the learned concerning the title of Hippolytus whereby he is called bishop of Rome, as he often is by the Greeks, two things have seemed to us able to be said more probably: that he himself, since he was ordained bishop of the nations at Rome, was a bishop in the city of Rome, whence spread abroad the title 'bishop of Rome', which is foreign to the truth. There lived in the age of Hippolytus Caius the presbyter, and the same man bishop of the nations at Rome, as will appear below, once the emendation of Johann Albert Fabricius is rejected, who substituted 'of Athens' in place of 'of the nations' with no right and no necessity; and likewise that of Jacques Basnage, who speaking of Hippolytus says: For that custom is altogether new, nor does it at least savour of the pristine antiquity of which we are treating; namely, that some bishops should be at hand to relieve the cares of the Roman pontiffs. Yet further astray wandered Christoph August Heumann, who recognized Hippolytus as only a civil overseer, or curator and inspector of the sea-coast, so that the bravest martyr, both living and dead, has ever had trouble with those who wish to err. At that time, therefore, since the City flourished with an innumerable multitude of people, and thence the number of Christians increased day by day, the Roman pontiffs employed most select and most learned men as helpers, whom they might use in the administration of the Church, and willed them to be in the rank of bishops. There follows the care of the Church of Portus committed to Hippolytus, concerning which Church let no one oppose the silence or ignorance of Eusebius of Caesarea and St Jerome in order to set up the chair of Hippolytus at Portus in Arabia. For both writers could more easily keep silence concerning Portus Romanus, which was far distant, than concerning the Portus of Arabia, which they had nearer at hand. And to omit other things, the statue of Hippolytus is a singular witness that not a bishop of Arabia, but one of this neighbourhood is indicated by it; for on account of the Paschal Cycle there was no need of a statue, for which a marble tablet would have sufficed. Moreover, the Cycle itself shows much more manifestly that its author lived not in the East, but in these very regions of ours. For the whole of it is adapted to the use of the Latins, and so foreign to the custom of the Easterns that it could not be understood by the most learned men who were contemporaries of Hippolytus and flourished in the East. St Anatolius of Laodicea himself, most celebrated in this same study, says: Hippolytus composed a cycle of 16 years by certain unknown courses of the moon. But others have more clearly vindicated the see of Hippolytus, and especially the most illustrious Constantinus Ruggerius, whose 80 pages written on this subject we have inspected, and which were recently learnedly completed into a dissertation
Editors' notes and page, col. 279
Footnotes
(45) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 279
Basnag., Animadv. de S. Hippolyti Vit., Lect. antiq. Canisii, I, pag. 10.
Basnage, Observations on the Life of St Hippolytus, in Canisius's Lectiones antiquae, I, p. 10.
(printed under page 150)
(46) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 279
Heuman., Primit. Gotting. pag. 240.
Heumann, Primitiae Gottingenses, p. 240.
(printed under page 150)
(47) ‹anchor: inquit› · call in col 279
S. Anatol., Praefat. in Canon. Paschal., apud Bucherium pag. 439.
St Anatolius, Preface to the Paschal Canon, in Bucherius, p. 439.
(printed under page 150)
(48) ‹anchor: Constantinus Ruggerius V. C.› · call in col 279
Ruggerii et Buschii Dissert. de Port. S. Hippolyti sede.
The dissertation of Ruggieri and Busch on Portus as the see of St Hippolytus.
(printed under page 150)
Page
- running head: 279 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A Transtiberina dicitur; B sublevandis Romanorum; C Eusebii Caesariensis; D Oriente floruerunt
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Transtiberina dicitur (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: abso-[lutam]
- other: the word absolutam was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 280
notisque illustratam immigrasse cognovimus. Ac plura quidem, quae proferre potuissemus, exposita ibidem offendimus, ut aliqua tantum supersint, quae disputationem de pluribus Hippolytis expediant. Duo maxime insignes cultu anniversario Romae fuerunt Hippolyti martyres: primus miles, cujus praeclarum fuit monumentum conjunctum templo S. Laurentii in agro Verano. Hujus nomen fasti Ecclesiae exhibent Idibus Augusti. Exhibet quoque Prudentius: Si bene commemini, colit hunc pulcherrima Roma Idibus Augusti mensis. Caetera quae Prudentius ipse ait se canere ad picturae fidem, historice de uno tantum Hippolyto non posse accipi venerabilis Baronius cardinalis admonuit, ut mirum sit viros criticae studiosos deinde pictoris licentiam pro veritate habuisse, aut errorem certe, qui exoriri potuit illa inspecta, noluisse agnoscere, ut in unum tres Hippolyti coalescerent. Alterius Hippolyti, qui Portuensis est, varie dies festus recensetur, XI Kal. Sept. vel postridie, vel Non. Sept., a Graecis IV vel III Kal. Febr. Is aliquando Nonnus veteri more honoris caussa dictus invenitur, unde Nonni Edesseni Episcopi gestum aliquod sequiori aevo relatum est ad Hippolytum Portuensem. In Portu Romano corpus Hippolyti servatum esse ad usque initium IX saeculi Anastasius prodidit. Fecit idem almificus pontifex (Leo III) in basilica Beati Hippolyti martyris in civitate Portuensi vestes de stauraci duas, unam super corpus ejus, et aliam in altari majori. Eodem vero exeunte saeculo a Formoso nondum pontifice summo, at episcopo Portuensi, corpus Hippolyti cum aliis in Tiberinam insulam translatum est, quod coaeva docet epigraphe:
and illustrated with notes. And indeed we have found set forth in the same place several things which we could have brought forward, so that only a few remain to clear up the discussion concerning the several men named Hippolytus. Two martyrs named Hippolytus were especially distinguished by an annual cult at Rome: the first a soldier, whose splendid monument was joined to the church of St Lawrence in the Ager Veranus. The fasti of the Church exhibit his name on the Ides of August. Prudentius also exhibits it: If I remember well, most beautiful Rome venerates this man on the Ides of the month of August. The other things which Prudentius himself says that he sings according to the credit of a painting, the venerable Cardinal Baronius warned cannot be taken historically of one Hippolytus only; so that it is wonderful that men zealous for criticism afterwards held the licence of a painter for the truth, or certainly were unwilling to acknowledge the error which could arise from inspecting it, whereby three men named Hippolytus coalesced into one. Of the other Hippolytus, who is of Portus, the feast day is variously reckoned: the 11th before the Kalends of September, or the day after, or the Nones of September, and by the Greeks the 4th or 3rd before the Kalends of February. He is sometimes found called Nonnus in the ancient manner for the sake of honour, whence some deed of Nonnus, bishop of Edessa, was in a later age referred to Hippolytus of Portus. Anastasius recorded that the body of Hippolytus was preserved in Portus Romanus right down to the beginning of the ninth century: The same benign pontiff (Leo III) made in the basilica of the blessed martyr Hippolytus in the city of Portus two vestments of stauracium, one over his body, and the other on the high altar. And at the close of the same century, by Formosus, not yet supreme pontiff, but bishop of Portus, the body of Hippolytus was translated with others to the Tiber Island, which a contemporary inscription teaches:
HIC. REQUIESCUNT. CORPORA SCŌR. MARTYRV̄. YPPOLITI. TAVRINI. HERCVLANI. ATQ. IOANNIS. CALIBITIS FORMOSVS. EP̄S CONDIDIT.
HERE REST THE BODIES OF THE HOLY MARTYRS HIPPOLYTUS, TAURINUS, HERCULANUS, AND JOHN CALIBITA. BISHOP FORMOSUS ENSHRINED THEM.
Quoniam itaque non dubitamus quin Hippolytus fuerit Portus Romani episcopus, illud facilius impetrabimus, Portuensem episcopum aliquandiu in sua dioecesi numerasse regionem urbis Transtiberinam, ipsamque Tiberinam insulam, sive quia ea pars extra Urbis pomeria flumine definita censebatur, sive, ut certum est, Romanorum pontificum insigni humanitate, qua praeter Ecclesiae ornamenta etiam nonnulla deinceps consecuti sunt, quae ad imperium pertinent, veluti illud est capiendi eorum haereditates, qui intestato decederent. Exstant ea de re adhuc diplomata Benedicti VIII, anno 1019; Joannis XIX, anno 1026 et Leonis IX, qui Joanni
Since therefore we do not doubt that Hippolytus was bishop of Portus Romanus, we shall the more easily obtain this point, that the bishop of Portus for some time reckoned in his diocese the Transtiberine region of the city and the Tiber Island itself, whether because that part, bounded by the river, was accounted outside the pomerium of the City, or, as is certain, by the signal kindness of the Roman pontiffs, whereby besides the ornaments of the Church they afterwards also obtained some things which pertain to civil authority, such as that right of taking the inheritances of those who died intestate. There are still extant concerning that matter diplomas of Benedict VIII in the year 1019, of John XIX in the year 1026, and of Leo IX, who to John,
Editors' notes and page, col. 280
Footnotes
(49) ‹anchor: Exhibet quoque Prudentius› · call in col 280
Prudent. Περὶ στεφάνων, XI.
Prudentius, Peristephanon (On the Crowns), XI.
(printed under page 150)
(50) ‹anchor: sequiori aevo› · call in col 280
Petr. Damian., de Abd. epis.
Peter Damian, On the Resignation of a Bishop.
(printed under page 150)
(51) ‹anchor: Anastasius prodidit› · call in col 280
Anastas. Bibl., ed. Vignol. II, pag. 266.
Anastasius the Librarian, Vignoli's edition, II, p. 266.
(printed under page 150)
(52) ‹anchor: coaeva docet epigraphe› · call in col 280
Gruter. MLIII. et Bottar. delle Scult. III, pag. 21. Paciaud. de Baln. Christian. pag. 41. Passion. Inscript. Antich. pag. 121.
Gruter, MLIII; and Bottari, Delle sculture, III, p. 21; Paciaudi, De balneis Christianorum, p. 41; Passionei, Iscrizioni antiche, p. 121.
(printed under page 150)
(53) ‹anchor: et Leonis IX› · call in col 280
Ughell. Tom. I Ital. Sacr. pag. 116 et 120.
Ughelli, Italia sacra, vol. I, pp. 116 and 120 [last figure faint on the scan].
(printed under page 150)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 280
- marginal letters: A lutam notisque; B pro veritate; C culo a Formoso; D nam, ipsamque
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: lutam notisque illustratam (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); words split at start and end of column: [abso]lutam, Jo-[anni]
Portuensi antistiti vetustissimam Ecclesiae suae dignitatem, ac praecipue templum S. Adalberti in Tiberina insula, quae per id temporis dicebatur Lycaonia, repugnante Crescentio episcopo Sylvae Candidae, asseruit in ipso Lateranensi concilio II, quo exacto sententia pontificis prolata est. Quando autem suburbicarii episcopi nonnunquam episcopi Urbis nominati sunt, nemo non videt, quanto id nomen facilius adhaeserit episcopis Portus Romani, qui trans Tiberim tanta cum potestate obtinebant. Quamobrem intelligimus, unde repetenda sit consuetudo, qua Portuenses et Sylvae episcopi quotannis donaria quaedam in Vaticano templo excipiebant, quod ex monumentis basilicae haud ita pridem evulgatis quisque agnoverit. Hac etiam de causa factum est, ut Formosus adhuc Portuensis episcopus, quo tempore omnia barbari depraedabantur, metuque Saracenorum incolae Portum Romanum deseruerunt, exportarit corpus Hippolyti cum aliis a Portu Romano, ubi conditum fuerat, in locum, quo fieri poterat remotiorem sui episcopatus, in Tiberinam nempe insulam, ubi episcopum Portuensem habuisse domicilium in ecclesia S. Joannis inter duos pontes legimus. Illud autem in recitata epigraphe, quam Formosus loculo sacrorum pignorum inscripsit, etiam deprehenditur, quod nomina Hippolyti, Taurini, Herculiani, exhibet, quae ipsa leguntur in veterrimo Liberiano Kalendario hac formula: Non. Sept. Aconti in Porto, et Nonni, et Herculani, et Taurini. Hippolytum quippe honoris causa dictum fuisse Nonnum ostendimus, quemadmodum auctor suo aevo satis idoneus: Nonnos vocamus, inquit, majores ob reverentiam; nam intelligitur paterna reverentia. Itali retinent, cum avos appellant, et prope Graeci significarunt, cum Hippolytum παλαιόν dixere. Aliquando Nunus effertur non secus atque in veteri marmore:
bishop of Portus, asserted the most ancient dignity of his Church, and especially the church of St Adalbert on the Tiber Island, which at that time was called Lycaonia, against the opposition of Crescentius, bishop of Silva Candida, in the Second Lateran Council itself, at the conclusion of which the sentence of the pontiff was pronounced. And since the suburbicarian bishops were sometimes named bishops of the City, everyone sees how much more easily that name clung to the bishops of Portus Romanus, who held authority across the Tiber with so great power. Wherefore we understand whence is to be traced the custom whereby the bishops of Portus and of Silva yearly received certain offerings in the Vatican church, which anyone may recognize from the monuments of the basilica published not so long ago. For this reason also it came to pass that Formosus, while still bishop of Portus, at the time when the barbarians were pillaging all things and from fear of the Saracens the inhabitants deserted Portus Romanus, carried away the body of Hippolytus with others from Portus Romanus, where it had been buried, to a place of his bishopric as remote as could be, namely to the Tiber Island, where we read that the bishop of Portus had a residence in the church of St John between the two bridges. Moreover, this also is observed in the cited inscription which Formosus inscribed on the reliquary of the sacred pledges, that it exhibits the names of Hippolytus, Taurinus, and Herculianus, which very names are read in the most ancient Liberian Calendar in this formula: On the Nones of September, of Acontus in Portus, and of Nonnus, and of Herculanus, and of Taurinus. For we have shown that Hippolytus for the sake of honour was called Nonnus, just as an author sufficiently competent for his age says: We call elders Nonni on account of reverence; for paternal reverence is understood. The Italians retain it when they call grandfathers nonni, and the Greeks expressed nearly the same when they called Hippolytus παλαιός. Sometimes Nunus is written, just as on an ancient marble:
DONATA NUNO SUO TERTULLO CUM FILIA IN PACE.
DONATA TO HER GRANDFATHER TERTULLUS WITH HER DAUGHTER IN PEACE.
« Non tantum itaque falsa est ab Lemoynio excogitata derivatio, qui filium explicat Nonnum quasi ex נין, dum agit de hoc ipso Hippolyti cognomine, sed veritati contraria. Salmasii ex μόνος deducentis, aliorumque etyma nihil moramur, quando usum inquirimus, non originem. Hoc igitur concedamus Graecis scriptoribus, ut quoniam Romani pontifices Hippolytum Portuensem ejusque successores eximiis quibusdam ornamentis honestare voluerunt, illi non a Portu sedem Hippolyti, sed ab Urbe ipsa nominarint, quemadmodum nostra exhibet epigraphe commentario praemissa. Neque recentiorem cum Scaligero, sed vetustissimam hanc esse opinari licet, atque Eusebii Caesariensis aevo
"Not only false, therefore, is the derivation devised by Le Moyne, who explains Nonnus as 'son', as if from נין, while treating of this very surname of Hippolytus, but contrary to the truth. For the etymologies of Salmasius deriving it from μόνος, and of others, we care nothing, since we are inquiring into usage, not origin. Let us therefore grant this to the Greek writers, that since the Roman pontiffs willed to honour Hippolytus of Portus and his successors with certain distinguished ornaments, they named the see of Hippolytus not from Portus, but from the City itself, just as our inscription prefixed to the commentary exhibits. Nor may we suppose with Scaliger that this is more recent, but rather most ancient, and earlier than the age of Eusebius of Caesarea,
Editors' notes and page, col. 281
Footnotes
(54) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 281
Bull. Bas. Vatic. I, 21.
Bullarium of the Vatican Basilica, I, 21.
(printed under page 151)
(55) ‹anchor: inter duos pontes legimus› · call in col 281
Cod. Reg. Suec. Vat. 385, p. 21.
Codex of the Queen of Sweden in the Vatican, 385, p. 21.
(printed under page 151)
(56) ‹anchor: paterna reverentia› · call in col 281
Pag. vocabul. Nonnos; Caug. Glossar. Med. Lat.
Pagi, under the word Nonnos; Du Cange, Glossarium mediae et infimae Latinitatis.
(printed under page 151)
(57) ‹anchor: in veteri marmore› · call in col 281
Fleevood., pag. 386.
Fleetwood, p. 386.
(printed under page 151)
(58) ‹anchor: quasi ex [Hebrew]› · call in col 281
Stephan. le Moyne, Prolegom. ad Varia Sacra, XXXI, 2.
Étienne Le Moyne, Prolegomena to the Varia sacra, XXXI, 2.
(printed under page 151)
Page
- running head: 281 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A anni Portuensi; B causa factum; C quippe honoris; D damus Graecis
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: anni Portuensi antistiti (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [Jo]anni
superiorem, ut si jam a Graecis Romae episcopus diceretur Hippolytus, mirum non est si vir peritissimus, cum optime nosset Hippolytum non fuisse Romanum pontificem, scripserit, ἑτέρας που Ἐκκλησίας, alterius cujusdam Ecclesiae, quae manifestius Hieronymus est interpretatus: nomen quippe urbis scire non potui. Quod vero Hieronymus, diu Romae commoratus, Hippolyti sedem ignorare non posset, quae ignoratio nimis extollitur, jam ea utemur, propterea quod Hieronymus in Oriente diutius commoratus est, quam Romae. »
so that if Hippolytus was already called bishop of Rome by the Greeks, it is no wonder if a most learned man, since he knew very well that Hippolytus was not the Roman pontiff, wrote, ἑτέρας που Ἐκκλησίας, of a certain other Church, which Jerome interpreted more manifestly: for I have not been able to know the name of the city. And as for the objection that Jerome, having dwelt long at Rome, could not be ignorant of the see of Hippolytus—an ignorance which is made too much of—we shall now make use of this very point, because Jerome dwelt longer in the East than at Rome."
Hactenus cl. vir Simon de Magistris.
Thus far the illustrious Simon de Magistris.
ARTICULUS III.
ARTICLE III.
DE MARTYRIO S. HIPPOLYTI, etc.
ON THE MARTYRDOM OF ST HIPPOLYTUS, etc.
De rebus S. Hippolyti nostri in episcopatu gestis monumentorum copia destituti nihil omnino singillatim edicere possumus. Verum quod reliquum habemus ex ejus operibus nobis sufficit ad persuadendum, quod is in episcopatu omne tempus ad instruendos fideles defendendamque adversus haereses quascunque veritatem orthodoxam impenderit.
Destitute of an abundance of monuments concerning the deeds done by our St Hippolytus in his episcopate, we can declare nothing at all in detail. But what we have remaining from his works suffices to persuade us that in his episcopate he spent all his time in instructing the faithful and defending orthodox truth against heresies of whatever kind.
Martyrum albo Hippolytum inscribunt Hieronymus, Gelasius, Theodoretus aliique: quapropter in Martyrologio Romano legitur, sub Alexandro imperatore, ob praeclaram fidei confessionem, manibus pedibusque ligatis in altam foveam aquis plenam praecipitatum occubuisse, cui et alios in martyrio socios ex Actis S. Aureae addit Baronius. Inter apocrypha tamen tum Hippolyti, tum S. Aureae Acta recensenda esse dubitari vix potest, utpote quae, ut idem inquit Baronius, mendis plena in multis restituenda. In Maximini vero aut Decii persecutione eum martyrii coronam adeptum fuisse verosimile inde redditur, quod anno Alexandri imperatoris primo, temporum Canonem, Paschalemque cyclum edidit, cui alia opuscula addidit, ut ex ejusdem operum catalogo videre est.
Jerome, Gelasius, Theodoret, and others enroll Hippolytus in the register of martyrs: wherefore in the Roman Martyrology it is read that under the Emperor Alexander, on account of his noble confession of the faith, with hands and feet bound he was cast headlong into a deep pit full of water and met his death; to whom Baronius adds also other companions in martyrdom from the Acts of St Aurea. Yet that the Acts both of Hippolytus and of St Aurea are to be reckoned among apocryphal writings can scarcely be doubted, inasmuch as they are, as the same Baronius says, full of faults and in many places in need of emendation. Moreover, that he gained the crown of martyrdom in the persecution of Maximinus or of Decius is rendered probable by the fact that in the first year of the Emperor Alexander he published his Canon of Times and Paschal Cycle, to which he added other short works, as may be seen from the catalogue of his works.
Caeterum quae scriptores de tempore martyrii hujus tradunt, diversa atque incerta sunt. Alii id referunt ad annum Christi 230. Sed severioribus criticis non placet, quod in Martyrologio Romano martyrium S. Hippolyti collocetur sub imperio Alexandri Severi, cum tunc nulla persecutio fuerit, quinimo ipse imperator Christianis faveret. Unde Ruinartius in Praefatione ad Acta martyrum sincera, pag. XLVIII, eumdem scrupulum proponit, et utcunque discutere conatur hoc modo: Alexandrum Heliogabali successorem Christianis favisse nemo potest inficiari, nisi omnes antiquos scriptores rejicere velit. Unde mirum est tot martyres sub ejus imperio passos a nonnullis recenseri. An id ad praefectos, quos sub ejus imperio saevissimos fuisse aiunt, referendum est?
For the rest, what writers hand down concerning the time of this martyrdom is diverse and uncertain. Some refer it to the year of Christ 230. But it does not please stricter critics that in the Roman Martyrology the martyrdom of St Hippolytus is placed under the reign of Alexander Severus, since at that time there was no persecution, nay rather the emperor himself favoured the Christians. Whence Ruinart in his Preface to the Sincere Acts of the Martyrs, p. 48, proposes the same difficulty, and endeavours after a fashion to dispel it in this way: That Alexander the successor of Heliogabalus favoured the Christians no one can deny, unless he wishes to reject all the ancient writers. Whence it is wonderful that so many martyrs are recounted by some to have suffered under his reign. Is this to be referred to the prefects, who they say were most savage under his reign?
Editors' notes and page, col. 282
Footnotes
(59) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 282
Hieronym., Praef. in Matthaeum.
Jerome, Preface to Matthew.
(printed under page 151)
(60) ‹anchor: Gelasius› · call in col 282
Gelas. ut sup. tom. IV Biblioth. PP.
Gelasius, as above, vol. IV of the Bibliotheca Patrum.
(printed under page 151)
(61) ‹anchor: Theodoretus› · call in col 282
Theodoret. dialog. 3, De impatibil.
Theodoret, Dialogue 3, On the Impassible.
(printed under page 151)
(62) ‹anchor: Martyrologio Romano› · call in col 282
Martyrolog. Rom., die 22 August.
Roman Martyrology, 22 August.
(printed under page 151)
(63) ‹anchor: addit Baronius› · call in col 282
Baron. ad ann. 129, num. 7.
Baronius, at the year 129 [so printed], no. 7.
(printed under page 151)
(64) ‹anchor: in multis restituenda› · call in col 282
Martyrolog. Roman., die 5 et 22 Augusti.
Roman Martyrology, 5 and 22 August.
(printed under page 151)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 282
- marginal letters: A superiorem, ut; B monumentorum copia; C tum S. Aureae; D artius in Praefatione
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: superiorem, ut si jam (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
Hinc nonnulli scriptores propter favorem Alexandri imperatoris erga Christianos mallent martyrium S. Hippolyti collocare sub Alexandri successore Maximino; inter hos Dodwellus ad annum 235 illius martyrium refert. Sed quamvis sub imperatore Maximino habeamus persecutionem adversus Christianos truculentam, quae praecipue spectabat ad eorum antistites, qualis etiam sanctus martyr noster fuit, asseveranter tamen martyrium S. Hippolyti non audemus statuere sub imperio Maximini, propter epistolam ipsius, quae ad reginam quamdam scripta est, et ex qua Theodoretus fragmenta aliquot allegavit. Baronius putat hanc reginam fuisse Mamaeam, imperatoris Alexandri matrem, quae Christianis utcunque favebat. Verum anno Christi 1551 in agro Verano repertus est Cyclus Paschalis, in cujus latere inter alias S. Hippolyti lucubrationes Exhortatio ad Severinam notatur. Unde Tillemontius suspicatur, hac Severina indicari Severam, Philippi imperatoris uxorem, quae Christiana fuisse perhibetur, et ad quam doctissimus Origenes etiam litteras dedit. Si illa Tillemontii suspicio vera sit, haud dubie martyrium S. Hippolyti usque ad annum Christi 250, sive ad persecutionem Decii imperatoris differendum est. Ad hanc suspicionem confirmandam accedit testimonium S. Epiphanii, qui haeresi 37, sive 57, contra Noetianos ita scribit: Post hunc alius quidam haereticus, Noetus nomine, prodiit; neque multis abhinc annis, sed ante hos centum fere ac triginta, nimirum priusquam sanctus hoc opus suum componeret. At S. Epiphanius circa annum 375 illud opus adversus haereses conscripsit, adeoque retrorsum numerando haeresis Noetiana sub imperatore Philippo exorta est, ut Tillemontius affirmat. Cum itaque S. Hippolytus hanc Noeti haeresim recenter exortam videatur impugnasse, ut apud eumdem Tillemontium l. c. ostenditur, in ista hypothesi martyrium ipsius ante persecutionem Decii imperatoris collocari non potest. Haec tamen Tillemontii argumenta non omnino certa sunt, quandoquidem ab aliis negantur.
Hence some writers, on account of the favour of the Emperor Alexander towards the Christians, would prefer to place the martyrdom of St Hippolytus under Alexander's successor Maximinus; among these Dodwell refers his martyrdom to the year 235. But although under the Emperor Maximinus we have a fierce persecution against the Christians, which was aimed especially at their bishops, such as our holy martyr also was, yet we do not venture confidently to place the martyrdom of St Hippolytus under the reign of Maximinus, on account of his epistle which was written to a certain queen, and from which Theodoret cited several fragments. Baronius thinks that this queen was Mamaea, mother of the Emperor Alexander, who after a fashion favoured the Christians. However, in the year of Christ 1551 there was found in the Ager Veranus a Paschal Cycle, on the side of which among other works of St Hippolytus an Exhortation to Severina is noted. Whence Tillemont suspects that by this Severina is indicated Severa, wife of the Emperor Philip, who is related to have been a Christian, and to whom the most learned Origen also wrote letters. If that suspicion of Tillemont be true, without doubt the martyrdom of St Hippolytus must be deferred until the year of Christ 250, or to the persecution of the Emperor Decius. To confirm this suspicion is added the testimony of St Epiphanius, who in Heresy 37, or 57, against the Noetians writes thus: After him another heretic came forth, Noetus by name; and that not many years ago, but about a hundred and thirty years before this, namely before the saint composed this work of his. Now St Epiphanius wrote that work against heresies about the year 375, and therefore by counting backwards the Noetian heresy arose under the Emperor Philip, as Tillemont affirms. Since therefore St Hippolytus seems to have impugned this heresy of Noetus when newly arisen, as is shown in the same Tillemont in the place cited, on that hypothesis his martyrdom cannot be placed before the persecution of the Emperor Decius. Yet these arguments of Tillemont are not altogether certain, since they are denied by others.
Nec quae de loco martyrii adduntur, ea munita sunt auctoritate, ut iis fides haberi debeat. Imo quoniam Eusebius et Hieronymus de martyrio hoc sileant, Christophorus Heumannus existimat Hippolytum falso iis annumerari, qui sanguinem suum pro causa Christi profuderint, eoque veritatem religionis Christianae confirmarint. Id quod licet
Nor are the things which are added concerning the place of his martyrdom fortified with such authority that credence must be given to them. Nay, since Eusebius and Jerome keep silence concerning this martyrdom, Christoph Heumann considers that Hippolytus is falsely numbered among those who shed their blood for the cause of Christ and thereby confirmed the truth of the Christian religion. Which, although
Editors' notes and page, col. 283
Footnotes
(65) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 283
Dodwell, , Dissertat. Cyprianicar. XI, § 50, pag. 83.
Dodwell, Dissertationes Cyprianicae, XI, § 50, p. 83.
(printed under page 152)
(66) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 283
Theodoret., dialog. 2 et 3, sive tom. IV Opp., pag. 88 et 155.
Theodoret, Dialogues 2 and 3, that is, vol. IV of the Works, pp. 88 and 155.
(printed under page 152)
(67) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 283
Baron. in Annal., ad ann. 259, num. 10.
Baronius, in the Annals, at the year 259, no. 10.
(printed under page 152)
(68) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 283
Tillemont, tom. III Mémoir., pag. 243.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, p. 243.
(printed under page 152)
(69) ‹anchor: Tillemontius affirmat› · call in col 283
Idem, ibidem.
The same, in the same place.
(printed under page 152)
(70) ‹anchor: Christophorus Heumannus› · call in col 283
Heumann., laudat. Dissertat., § 12, pag. 13.
Heumann, the dissertation cited, § 12, p. 13.
(printed under page 152)
Page
- running head: 283 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A Hinc nonnulli; B Cyclus Paschalis; C nimirum priusquam; D sileant, Christophorus
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Hinc nonnulli scriptores (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: li-[cet]
haud simpliciter affirmandum esse putem; minus tamen diffiteor, quae de martyrio ejus narrantur, pleraque esse incerta ac tenebris involuta.
I do not think it should be simply affirmed, yet I do not deny that most of the things which are related concerning his martyrdom are uncertain and wrapped in darkness.
De Hippolyto quidem martyre nonnulla cecinit Prudentius, quae, si Hippolyto episcopo aptari possent, certiora Actis essent. Nostrum Hippolytum, id est, episcopum, invenit Ruinartius in hymno Prudentii, ait Basnagius. Si attente tamen Ruinartii monitum in Prudentii carmina legisset, contrarium ab eo tradi didicisset; nam Hippolytum a Prudentio celebratum ab altero, de quo agimus, cujusque opuscula Eusebius et Hieronymus memorant, distinguendum esse ibidem adnotat Ruinartius; quinimo tres ejusdem nominis martyres discernendos esse, quos a Martyrologiorum auctoribus in unum confusos fuisse Baronius aliique tradiderunt. Et sane Hippolytus a Prudentio laudatus, qui in Portu Romano ad Ostia Tiberina, ut vulgo creditur, martyrium subiit, diversus omnino a nostro est. Hic quippe episcopus incertae sedis, ille vero Romanae Ecclesiae presbyter, ac Novati opinionibus aliquando addictus, et martyrii tantum corona clarus; noster vero non solum martyrio, sed et eruditione et scriptis celeberrimus. Ille demum, Prudentio teste, furentibus equis raptatus interiit; noster vero, si fides Martyrologiis, in foveam demersus occubuit.
Concerning Hippolytus the martyr Prudentius indeed sang some things which, if they could be fitted to Hippolytus the bishop, would be surer than the Acts. Ruinart found our Hippolytus, that is, the bishop, in the hymn of Prudentius, says Basnage. Yet if he had attentively read Ruinart's admonition on the poems of Prudentius, he would have learned that the contrary is handed down by him; for Ruinart notes in the same place that the Hippolytus celebrated by Prudentius is to be distinguished from the other of whom we are treating, and whose works Eusebius and Jerome mention; nay more, that three martyrs of the same name are to be distinguished, whom Baronius and others handed down to have been confused into one by the authors of the Martyrologies. And certainly the Hippolytus praised by Prudentius, who underwent martyrdom in Portus Romanus at the mouths of the Tiber, as is commonly believed, is altogether different from ours. For the latter was a bishop of an uncertain see, whereas the former was a presbyter of the Roman Church, and at one time addicted to the opinions of Novatus, and illustrious only by the crown of martyrdom; while ours is most celebrated not only by martyrdom, but also by erudition and writings. Finally, the former, as Prudentius testifies, perished dragged by raging horses; whereas ours, if credence is to be given to the Martyrologies, met his death plunged into a pit.
Theodoretus hunc sanctum doctorem fluente fontis comparat, dum dialogo 3, sive tomo IV Operum suorum pagina 154 et sequente, testimonium ipsius et aliorum sanctorum Patrum contra haereticos adducit hoc modo: Fac igitur pateant aures, et spiritualium fontium fluenta accipe, sancti Ignatii Antiocheni et martyris ex epistola ad Smyrnenses... Irenaei Lugdunensis episcopi ex tertio libro adversus haereses... sancti Hippolyti episcopi et martyris ex epistola ad quamdam reginam. S. Chrysostomus, seu potius alius antiquus auctor sub ejus nomine, attribuit S. Hippolyto ingenium excellens, eloquentiamque suavissimam, nec dubitat eum conferre cum S. Ignatio M. et S. Dionysio Corinthio vel Alexandrino. S. Anastasius saeculi VII confessor eumdem condecorat titulo magni et sacratissimi doctoris, testis fidelis veritatis, atque organi sancti Spiritus. Leontius Byzantinus sanctum doctorem nostrum recenset inter illustrissimos Ecclesiae Patres, qui a nato Salvatore ad imperium usque Constantini M. floruere.
Theodoret compares this holy doctor to the stream of a fountain, when in Dialogue 3, or vol. 4 of his Works, p. 154 and following, he adduces the testimony of him and of other holy Fathers against heretics in this way: Cause therefore your ears to lie open, and receive the streams of spiritual fountains, of St Ignatius of Antioch and martyr from the epistle to the Smyrnaeans... of Irenaeus bishop of Lyons from the third book against heresies... of St Hippolytus bishop and martyr from the epistle to a certain queen. St Chrysostom, or rather another ancient author under his name, attributes to St Hippolytus an excellent genius and a most sweet eloquence, nor does he hesitate to compare him with St Ignatius the Martyr and St Dionysius of Corinth or of Alexandria. St Anastasius, confessor of the seventh century, adorns the same man with the title of great and most sacred doctor, faithful witness of the truth, and organ of the Holy Spirit. Leontius of Byzantium reckons our holy doctor among the most illustrious Fathers of the Church who flourished from the birth of the Saviour right down to the reign of Constantine the Great.
Editors' notes and page, col. 284
Footnotes
(71) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 284
Ruinart., Act. sinc. MM., pag. 157.
Ruinart, Acta sincera martyrum, p. 157.
(printed under page 152)
(72) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 284
Prudent. Περὶ στεφάνων, carm. XI.
Prudentius, Peristephanon, poem XI.
(printed under page 152)
(73) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 284
Basnage, Annal., an. 222, num. 8.
Basnage, Annals, year 222, no. 8.
(printed under page 152)
(74) ‹anchor: vel Alexandrino› · call in col 284
Ubi beatus ille chorus est episcoporum et doctorum, qui tanquam luminaria in mundo resplenduerunt verbum vitae continentes?... Ubi Hippolytus suavissimus et benevolentissimus? Ubi Basilius Magnus, etc. Chrysostom. tom. VI Opp., orat. 51, pag. 480.
Where is that blessed choir of bishops and teachers, who shone like lights in the world, holding fast the word of life?... Where is Hippolytus, most gentle and most kindly? Where is Basil the Great, etc. Chrysostom, vol. VI of the Works, oration 51, p. 480.
(printed under page 152)
(75) ‹anchor: sancti Spiritus› · call in col 284
«Ecce nunc et sacratissimus hic et magnus doctor, veritatisque testis fidelis concorditer cum aliis omnibus sanctis catholicae Dei ac apostolicae institutionibus Ecclesiae, duas secundum unitionem inconfusam et impatibilem quemadmodum naturas, ita etiam duas voluntates . , . . confiteri jubet.» Anastas. in Collect. Sirmondiana, tom. III, p. 590
"See now also this most holy and great teacher and faithful witness of the truth, in concord with all the other saints, by the institutions of God's catholic and apostolic Church, bids us confess that, just as there are two natures according to a union without confusion and without suffering, so also there are two wills . . . ." Anastasius, in the Collectanea, Sirmond's edition, vol. III, p. 590.
(printed under page 152)
(76) ‹anchor: Constantini M. floruere› · call in col 284
«Temporibus illis quae a Christi nativit usque ad imperium Constantini numerantur, [illegible] (continues)
"In those times which are reckoned from the birth of Christ up to the reign of Constantine, …" (continues)
(printed under page 152)
Page
- running head: ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 284
- marginal letters: A cet haud simpliciter; B ribus in unum; C suorum pagina; D ritus. Leontius
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: cet haud simpliciter (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [li]cet
CAPUT II.
CHAPTER II.
DE SCRIPTIS GENUINIS SANCTI HIPPOLYTI.
ON THE GENUINE WRITINGS OF ST HIPPOLYTUS.
ARTICULUS I.
ARTICLE I.
DE CATALOGO LIBRORUM IN HIPPOLYTI STATUA SCULPTO.
ON THE CATALOGUE OF BOOKS CARVED ON THE STATUE OF HIPPOLYTUS.
Cum Hippolyti librorum catalogus, qui in statua sexto demum saeculo posita designatus est, quamdam, etiamsi non magnam, habeat auctoritatem, necesse est, ut priusquam de nostri scriptis disquirere incipiamus, mancum contextum illius catalogi restituamus.
Since the catalogue of the books of Hippolytus which is delineated on the statue erected only in the sixth century has some, even if not great, authority, it is necessary that before we begin to inquire into the writings of our author, we restore the mutilated text of that catalogue.
In quatuor prioribus lineis litteras nonnullas detritas esse satis apparet. Ita in prima linea legitur ΙΟΥΣ. Scaliger vult has litteras esse reliquias verbi ψαλμούς, quod conjungendum sit cum litteris in sequenti linea lectis ΝΙΑΣ; ΝΙΑΣ litteris autem commutatis in ΝΟΙΑΣ putat ultimas has esse syllabas verbi μετανοίας, ita ut intelligendi sint ψαλμοὶ μετανοίας (psalmi poenitentiales). Quam conjecturam, quae gravissimis causis refutata est a Stephano Moynio, omnino falsam esse, inde quoque elucet, quod et in sequenti tertia linea adnotatus est nostri in psalmos commentarius, et μετανοίας verbum, cum novem tantum litteras contineat, non totam explevisse lineam videtur. In quaque enim linea litteris impleta sexdecim fere inveniuntur litterae. Stephanus ipse conjecit, legendum esse εἰς πρωτοπλάστους καὶ περὶ κοσμογονίας vel ζωογονίας. Quae conjectura non omni verisimilitudine caret; nam constat nostrum scripsisse in Hexaemeron et in ea quae post Hexaemeron; omittam autem respectu habito ad litterarum numerum καί particulam. Mirum tamen me habet, quod non vice versa scriptum sit περὶ κοσμογονίας, εἰς πρωτοπλάστους. Difficile est, cum tot exstent Hippolyti libri, et sculptor libris tribueret titulos obscuros atque novos (e. c. ἐγγαστρίμυθον), satis perspicue demonstrare, qui libri intelligendi sint. Itaque rem in suspenso relinquo; hoc unum tantum contendens, illis litteris significatos esse commentarios in sacra Scripta;
In the first four lines it is sufficiently apparent that some letters have been worn away. Thus in the first line is read ΙΟΥΣ. Scaliger will have it that these letters are the remains of the word ψαλμούς, which is to be joined with the letters read in the following line, ΝΙΑΣ; and changing the letters ΝΙΑΣ into ΝΟΙΑΣ, he thinks that these are the last syllables of the word μετανοίας, so that ψαλμοὶ μετανοίας (penitential psalms) are to be understood. That this conjecture, which was refuted for the weightiest reasons by Stephen Le Moyne, is altogether false, is clear from this also, both that in the following third line is noted our author's commentary on the Psalms, and that the word μετανοίας, since it contains only nine letters, does not seem to have filled out the whole line. For in each line filled with letters about sixteen letters are found. Stephen himself conjectured that we should read εἰς πρωτοπλάστους καὶ περὶ κοσμογονίας or ζωογονίας. Which conjecture is not devoid of all probability; for it is established that our author wrote on the Hexaemeron and on the things after the Hexaemeron; I would, however, having regard to the number of letters, omit the particle καί. Yet wonder holds me that it was not written conversely, περὶ κοσμογονίας, εἰς πρωτοπλάστους. It is difficult, since so many books of Hippolytus exist and the sculptor assigned obscure and novel titles to the books (for instance, ἐγγαστρίμυθον), to demonstrate with sufficient clearness what books are to be understood. Therefore I leave the matter in suspense, contending for this one thing only, that by those letters were signified commentaries on the sacred Scriptures;
Editors' notes and page, col. 285
Footnotes
(76) (continued) · call on p. 152, col 284
ctores et Patres exstiterunt: Ignatius ille Theophorus, Irenaeus, Justinus philosophus et martyr, Clemens et Hippolytus episcopi Romani,» etc. Leont. Byzant. Πράξει, pag. 430.
… [there] stood forth teachers and Fathers: that Ignatius the God-bearer, Irenaeus, Justin the philosopher and martyr, Clement and Hippolytus, bishops of Rome," etc. Leontius of Byzantium, Πράξει [so printed], p. 430.
(printed under page 153)
(77) ‹anchor: ARTICULUS I› · call in col 285
Articulum hunc primum addimus ex commentatione historico-critica de S. Hippolyti vita et scriptis, quam anno 1838 Gottingae edidit Carolus Guilielmus Haenel, Luchoviensis. EDIT. PATR.
We add this first article from the historical-critical treatise on the life and writings of St Hippolytus which Karl Wilhelm Haenel of Lüchow published at Göttingen in 1838. EDITOR OF THE PATROLOGY.
(printed under page 153)
(78) ‹anchor: catalogi restituamus› · call in col 285
Catalogum exscripserunt Gruterus (Thesaurus inscriptionum, p. 140), Fabricius (Opp. Hipp. vol. I, in tab. II, a, post p. 36), Cave (De script. eccl., vol. I, p. 104).
The catalogue has been copied out by Gruter (Thesaurus inscriptionum, p. 140), Fabricius (Works of Hippolytus, vol. I, in plate II, a, after p. 36), and Cave (De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis, vol. I, p. 104).
(printed under page 153)
(79) ‹anchor: Scaliger vult› · call in col 285
In canonem pasch. Hipp. (apud Fabr., vol. I, p. 79).
On Hippolytus's Paschal canon (in Fabricius, vol. I, p. 79).
(printed under page 153)
(80) ‹anchor: inveniuntur litterae› · call in col 285
Conf. statuam designatam apud nos infra.
Compare the statue as drawn in our edition below.
(printed under page 153)
Page
- running head: 285 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S. IH
- marginal letters: A ARTICULUS I; B commutatis in ΝΟΙΑΣ; C habito ad litterarum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; full-width headings at top (CAPUT II. / DE SCRIPTIS GENUINIS SANC...) cut off at right edge, not set; editors' matter: ARTICULUS I. (from Haenel's dissertation, added by Migne's editor to Lumper); word split at end of column: Scri-[pta]
nam apparet, illis absolutis dogmaticos apologeticosque libros demum laudari.
for it is apparent that only when those are finished are the dogmatic and apologetic books cited.
ΑΛΜΟΥΣ. Quin hae litterae sint reliquiae vocis ψαλμούς, non dubito, in quos nostrum scripsisse testatur Hieronymus. Itaque respiciens ad lineae spatium litteris implendum, legendum puto τὰ εἰς τοὺς ψαλμούς.
ΑΛΜΟΥΣ. That these letters are the remains of the word ψαλμούς, I do not doubt, on which Jerome testifies that our author wrote. Therefore, looking to the space of the line to be filled with letters, I think we should read τὰ εἰς τοὺς ψαλμούς.
ΓΑΣΤΡΙΜΥΘΟΝ. Scaliger legendum esse ἐγγαστρίμυθον recte vidit. Cum Hieronymus in catalogo nostri librorum laudet librum de Saulo et Pythonissa, Stephanus justo jure contendit, libellum hoc titulo inscriptum spectasse ad Pythonissam illam, quae Sauli regis jussu Samuelis animam ex Orco evocasse narratur I Sam. cap. 28.
ΓΑΣΤΡΙΜΥΘΟΝ. Scaliger rightly saw that we should read ἐγγαστρίμυθον. Since Jerome in the catalogue of the books of our author cites a book on Saul and the Pythoness, Stephen with just right contends that the tractate inscribed with this title concerned that Pythoness who at the command of King Saul is related to have called up the soul of Samuel from the lower world, 1 Samuel 28.
Πρὸς Σεβηρεῖναν. Stephan. conjecit ΣΕΒΗΡΑΝ ΑΥ, atque putat Severae Philippi Arabis uxori hanc epistolam datam esse.
Πρὸς Σεβηρεῖναν. Stephen conjectured ΣΕΒΗΡΑΝ ΑΥ, and thinks that this epistle was addressed to Severa, wife of Philip the Arab.
Ὠιδαὶ εἰς πάσας γραφάς. Mirum videtur, quod noster dicitur de tota sacra Scriptura vel de quoque ejus libro homilias habuisse. Itaque conjecit Stephanus ᾠδαὶ εἰς πάσας αἱρέσεις. Quod vituperat Cave putans ista ratione quadrata rotundis permutari facillime posse. Negari tamen non potest, similitudinem esse inter litteras utriusque verbi tantam, ut qui primus edidit catalogum, litteris in statua detritis, errore deceptus illa verba facile commutare posset. Pro ᾠδὰς εἰς legere vult idem Stephanus πρός, ita ut totus sonet titulus πρὸς πάσας τὰς αἱρέσεις. Quod quidem sagacissimum; ipsi tamen rem in suspenso relinquimus, cum nobis non liceat statuam ipsam et catalogum in ea designatum inspicere.
Ὠιδαὶ εἰς πάσας γραφάς. It seems wonderful that our author is said to have delivered homilies on the whole of sacred Scripture or on each book of it. Therefore Stephen conjectured ᾠδαὶ εἰς πάσας αἱρέσεις. Which Cave censures, thinking that in that way square things can most easily be exchanged for round. Yet it cannot be denied that there is so great a similarity between the letters of both words that he who first published the catalogue, since the letters on the statue were worn away, deceived by an error could easily interchange those words. In place of ᾠδὰς εἰς the same Stephen wishes to read πρός, so that the whole title reads πρὸς πάσας τὰς αἱρέσεις. Which is indeed most sagacious; yet we ourselves leave the matter in suspense, since we are not permitted to inspect the statue itself and the catalogue delineated upon it.
Ut plane mancum atque corruptum esse catalogum in statua designatum intelligamus, eum conferre placet cum catalogis nostri librorum, quem invenimus apud Eusebium et Hieronymum.
That we may understand that the catalogue delineated on the statue is plainly mutilated and corrupt, it pleases us to compare it with the catalogues of the books of our author which we find in Eusebius and Jerome.
Editors' notes and page, col. 286
Footnotes
(81) ‹anchor: recte vidit› · call in col 286
Apud Fabric. vol. I, p. 81.
In Fabricius, vol. I, p. 81.
(printed under page 153)
(82) ‹anchor: conjecit Stephanus› · call in col 286
L. I., p. 1088.
At the place cited, p. 1088.
(printed under page 153)
(83) ‹anchor: vituperat Cave› · call in col 286
L. I., tom. I, p. 106.
At the place cited, vol. I, p. 106.
(printed under page 153)
Page
- running head: SCRIPTIS S. IHPPOLYTI. 286
- marginal letters: A pta; nam apparet; B Πρὸς Σεβηρεῖναν.; C idem Stephanus
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; full-width headings at top (...APUT II. / ...NUINIS SANCTI HIPPOLYTI.) cut off at left edge, not set; editors' matter: pta; nam apparet (continuation of Haenel's dissertation); word split at start of column: [Scri]pta
ΙΟΥΣ / ΝΙΑΣ / In Psalmos. / De Pythonissa. / De Evangelio secundum Joannem et Apocalypsi. / De Charismatibus. / Apostolica traditio. / Chronicon. / Contra Graecos et in Platonem vel etiam de omni. / Exhortatorius ad Severinam. / Demonstratio temporum Paschae quemadmodum in tabula. / Odae in omnes Scripturas (adversus omnes haereses). / De Deo et carnis resurrectione. / De bono et unde malum.
ΙΟΥΣ / ΝΙΑΣ / On the Psalms. / On the Pythoness. / On the Gospel according to John and the Apocalypse. / On Charisms. / Apostolic Tradition. / Chronicle. / Against the Greeks and against Plato, or also on the Universe. / Exhortation to Severina. / Demonstration of the Times of Pascha as in the Table. / Odes on All the Scriptures (Against All Heresies). / On God and the Resurrection of the Flesh. / On the Good and Whence Evil Comes.
ARTICULUS II.
ARTICLE II.
S. HIPPOLYTI LIBER CUI TITULUS: « DEMONSTRATIO DE CHRISTO ET ANTICHRISTO. »
THE BOOK OF ST HIPPOLYTUS ENTITLED: "DEMONSTRATION CONCERNING CHRIST AND ANTICHRIST."
Plurima scripsit Hippolytus, Eusebio, Hieronymo, Photio aliisque memorata. Quaedam eorum ad nos pervenerunt; plerisque autem per injuriam temporum nunc caremus; aut fragmenta tantum supersunt, quae cum in editis libris, tum in codicibus manuscriptis habentur. Sunt quoque nonnulla, quae Hippolyti quidem nomen prae se ferunt; illorum autem ea est ratio, ut recte eruditi viri judicaverint, ista minus composita esse ab Hippolyto, sed in libris dubiis ac suppositis numerari debere.
Hippolytus wrote very many things, mentioned by Eusebius, Jerome, Photius, and others. Certain of them have come down to us; of most, however, through the injury of time we are now deprived, or fragments only survive, which are found both in printed books and in manuscript codices. There are also some works which display the name of Hippolytus indeed, yet their character is such that learned men have rightly judged that they were not composed by Hippolytus, but ought to be numbered among doubtful and supposititious books.
Et primum quidem locum inter opera integra seu ampliora S. Hippolyti obtinet Demonstratio de Christo et Antichristo, cujus meminere Hieronymus, Andreas Caesariensis, Germanus CP., Joannes Damascenus, et Photius; eorumque loca inferius inter veterum testimonia scriptis Hippolyteis praemisit C. V. Gallandius; ut propterea mirari subeat Basnagii confidentiam, qui antiquorum scriptorum fide posthabita, omnium eruditorum calculo comprobata, fictitium Hippolytum appellat hujus Demonstrationis auctorem. Utinam vero legisset ille, perpendissetque sincerum primi editoris judicium, qui sane sibi suspectus haud esse jure poterat. Sic igitur Gudius: « Illustre
And the first place indeed among the entire or fuller works of St Hippolytus is held by the Demonstration concerning Christ and Antichrist, which Jerome, Andrew of Caesarea, Germanus of Constantinople, John of Damascus, and Photius mention; and their passages the illustrious Gallandi prefixed below among the testimonies of the ancients to the writings of Hippolytus; so that on that account one is led to wonder at the confidence of Basnage, who, setting aside the credit of the ancient writers approved by the suffrage of all the learned, calls the author of this Demonstration a fictitious Hippolytus. Would that he had read and weighed the candid judgement of the first editor, who certainly could by no right be suspected by him. Thus therefore Gudius: "The illustrious
Editors' notes and page, col. 287
Footnotes
(84) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 287 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Neander vir doctissimus dubitat, num de charismatibus et de apostolica traditione in eodem libro disputaverit Hippol. In duobus vero libris ea de re illum disseruisse puto, cum non legatur ἀποστολικὴ παράδοσις περὶ χαρισμάτων, sed vice versa. De quibus libris latius atque fusius disputat Stephanus; aliorum virorum doctorum hac de re sententiae leguntur apud Fabricium, tom. I, pag. 83. Conf. Fabricii Bibl. Graec. ed. Harless., vol. VII, pag. 193.
The most learned Neander doubts whether Hippolytus discussed spiritual gifts and the apostolic tradition in the same book. I think, rather, that he treated the matter in two books, since what is read is not "the apostolic tradition concerning gifts", but the reverse. Stephanus discusses these books more broadly and at greater length; the opinions of other learned men on the matter are to be read in Fabricius, vol. I, p. 83. Compare Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca, Harles's edition, vol. VII, p. 193.
(printed under page 154)
(86) ‹anchor: C. V. Gallandius› · call in col 287
Galland., Biblioth. PP., tom. II, pag. 411, 417.
Gallandi, Bibliotheca veterum Patrum, vol. II, pp. 411, 417.
(printed under page 154)
(87) ‹anchor: appellat› · call in col 287
Basnag., Animadv. ad tom. I Thesauri Canis., pag. 10.
Basnage, Observations on vol. I of Canisius's Thesaurus, p. 10.
(printed under page 154)
(88) ‹anchor: Gudius› · call in col 287
Gud. apud Fabric. tom. I Opp. S. Hippolyti, pag. 2.
Gude, in Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of St Hippolytus, p. 2.
(printed under page 154)
Page
- running head: 287 DE VITA ET SCRIP
- marginal letters: A ARTICULUS II.; B Christo et Antichristo; C de re illum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; middle sub-column of 3-column table at top (Catalog. apud Euseb.) straddling cols. 287–288 cut off at right edge in 287 and set in col. 288; editors' matter: ΙΟΥΣ / ΝΙΑΣ and ARTICULUS II. (Haenel's table and Lumper's dissertation)
Catalog. apud Euseb. In Hexaemeron. / In ea quae post Hexaemeron (contra Marcionem). / De Pascha (lib. I). / De Pascha (lib. II) canon paschalis. / Adversus omnes haereses. / In Canticum cant. / In partem quamdam Ezechielis prophetae.
Catalogue in Eusebius: On the Hexaemeron. / On the Things after the Hexaemeron (Against Marcion). / On Pascha (Book 1). / On Pascha (Book 2), Paschal Canon. / Against All Heresies. / On the Song of Songs. / On a Certain Part of Ezekiel the Prophet.
Apud Hieronym. In Hexaemeron. / (Contra Marcionem). / De Psalmis. / De Saulo et Pythonissa. / De Apocalypsi. / Temporum canones. / De Pascha, canon paschalis. / Adversus omnes haereses. / De resurrectione. / In Cantic. cantic. / In Exodum. / In Genesin. / In Zachariam. / In Isaiam. / De Daniele. / De Proverbiis. / De Ecclesiaste. / De Antichristo.
In Jerome: On the Hexaemeron. / (Against Marcion). / On the Psalms. / On Saul and the Pythoness. / On the Apocalypse. / Canons of Times. / On Pascha, Paschal Canon. / Against All Heresies. / On the Resurrection. / On the Song of Songs. / On Exodus. / On Genesis. / On Zechariah. / On Isaiah. / On Daniel. / On Proverbs. / On Ecclesiastes. / On Antichrist.
Photii testimonium libenter adjungendum curavimus; ut si lectorem offenderet in hoc opusculo cogitationum, ipsiusque orationis simplicitas, nihil propterea dubitaret περὶ τῆς γνησιότητος. Photius libello nostro tanquam insignem notam apponit τὸ τῶν νοημάτων ἁπλούστερον. Et profecto, quidquid Hippolyto tribuebat, mirifice respondet. »
testimony of Photius we have gladly taken care to adjoin, so that if the simplicity of the thoughts and of the style itself in this tractate should offend the reader, he might not on that account doubt at all concerning its genuineness. Photius attaches to our little book as a distinguishing mark 'the greater simplicity of its thoughts'. And assuredly, whatever he attributed to Hippolytus corresponds wonderfully."
His autem de operis integritate habitis, pergit Gudius, atque de illius titulo hisce verbis edisserit: « Sed non omittenda est inscriptio, quam conservavit idem Photius: Περὶ Χριστοῦ καὶ Ἀντιχριστοῦ. Uterque codex Remensis et Ebroicensis, unde opus descriptum, similiter: Περὶ τοῦ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ περὶ τοῦ Ἀντιχριστοῦ. Ego vero discessi magnis rationibus. Non enim debebam conscientia convictus, librariorum errorem atque ignorantiam superstitiose propagare. Hippolytus causam dicet necessariae mutationis, cujus verba sunt: Verum quoniam jam tempus urget ad ea, quae nobis argumento proposita sunt, cum sufficiant, quae in exordio ad Dei gloriam peroravimus, aequum est, ut aggredientes ipsas divinas Scripturas, ex illis videamus, quis et qualis Antichristi adventus. Quid nunc est apertius, quam non ad argumentum pertinere, quae de Christo dixerat? Nihil se profiteri planissime testatur, praeterquam Antichristi demonstrationem. Credamus auctori potius
And having said these things concerning the integrity of the work, Gudius proceeds and discourses concerning its title in these words: "But the inscription which the same Photius preserved is not to be omitted: Concerning Christ and Antichrist. Both the Reims and the Évreux codices, from which the work was transcribed, have similarly: Concerning Our Saviour Jesus Christ, and Concerning Antichrist. I, however, departed from this for great reasons. For when convicted by my conscience, I ought not superstitiously to propagate the error and ignorance of copyists. Hippolytus himself will state the cause of the necessary change, whose words are: But since the time now presses for those things which are proposed to us as our subject, as the things which we have spoken at length in the exordium to the glory of God suffice, it is right that, approaching the divine Scriptures themselves, we see from them who and of what sort is the coming of Antichrist. What now is clearer than that the things which he had said concerning Christ do not pertain to the subject? He testifies most plainly that he professes nothing except a demonstration of Antichrist. Let us believe the author rather
Editors' notes and page, col. 288
Footnotes
(85) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 288 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Tituli h. l. collati eumdem librum designare videntur.
The titles compared in this place seem to denote the same book.
(printed under page 154)
(89) ‹anchor: adjungendum curavimus› · call in col 288
Phot., Biblioth. cod. CCII.
Photius, Bibliotheca, codex 202.
(printed under page 154)
(90) ‹anchor: Antichristi adventus› · call in col 288
De Antichr. cap. V.
On Antichrist, ch. V.
(printed under page 154)
Page
- running head: VITA ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 288
- marginal letters: A Photii testimonium; B vero discessi; C (86) Galland.
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; middle sub-column of 3-column table at top (Catalog. apud Euseb.) straddling cols. 287–288 set here with Apud Hieronym.; editors' matter: Catalog. apud Euseb. and Photii testimonium (Haenel's table and Lumper's dissertation)
quam Photio, cui librariorum stupor fraudi fuit. Error in hac ἐπιγραφῇ antiquior est octingentis annis. Sed erroris vetustate non movemur. Nam Photio testem fide atque aetate longe superiorem opponimus Hieronymum, cujus auctoritatem magni semper facio. Ille autem laudavit ἁπλῶς commentationem de Antichristo. Hoc ἐν παρόδῳ monendum fuit, ne quis nos juvenili temeritate in libros manu exaratos grassari suspicaretur. » Hactenus Gudius: cujus tamen sententia minus probatur Combefisio; eumque proinde cum Fabricio et Gallandio nos quoque assectamur. Notante enim Combefisio, cum se Hippolytus dicturum pollicetur, de revelando Christi adventu, de coelo, de sanctorum cum Christo regno, cumque tota tractatione Antichristum Christo opponat; non ita male sive Hippolytus, sive quivis alius, praenotavit, Περὶ Χριστοῦ καὶ Ἀντιχριστοῦ. Quod ita post Photianum codicem etiam ii repraesentant, ex quibus expressa Gudii editio: quibus proinde malui inhaerere quam ejus mutationi deferre. Hieronymum (cujus et ipse magni auctoritatem facio) adversari Photio non facile dixerim, quod Hippolyti plura recensendo De Antichristo solummodo dixerit. Nempe, nec de Christo negavit, sed sic summa, unde tractatus esset notior, ascripsit; Photius ex codice integrum titulum recensuit. Deinde eo spectat tota tractatio, ut Antichristi ex Scripturis demonstratione ab eo fidelibus caveat, et Christo adjungat, amborumque discrimen eum in finem aperiat; quod Christum non excludit, ne ipse pars argumenti videatur, et finis genuinus atque proprius tractationis, non solum extrinsecus.
than Photius, on whom the stupidity of copyists imposed. The error in this title is older than eight hundred years. Yet we are not moved by the antiquity of the error. For to Photius we oppose a witness far superior in credit and age, Jerome, whose authority I always value highly. And he cited simply a treatise On Antichrist. This had to be remarked in passing, lest anyone should suspect us of attacking handwritten books with youthful rashness." Thus far Gudius: whose opinion, however, is less approved by Combefis; and accordingly with Fabricius and Gallandi we also follow the latter. For as Combefis notes, since Hippolytus promises that he will speak of the revelation of the coming of Christ, of heaven, and of the reign of the saints with Christ, and since throughout the whole treatise he opposes Antichrist to Christ, not so badly did either Hippolytus or someone else prefix the title, Concerning Christ and Antichrist. Which after the Photian codex those codices also exhibit from which Gudius's edition was printed; to which accordingly I have preferred to adhere rather than defer to his alteration. That Jerome (whose authority I myself also value highly) contradicts Photius I would not easily say, merely because in recounting several works of Hippolytus he said only On Antichrist. Namely, he neither denied that it treated of Christ, but thus wrote down the main point whence the treatise was better known, whereas Photius recounted the entire title from his codex. Secondly, the whole treatise looks to this end, that by a demonstration of Antichrist from the Scriptures he may put the faithful on their guard against him, and join them to Christ, and to that end lay open the difference between both; which does not exclude Christ from seeming Himself also to be part of the subject, and the genuine and proper end of the treatise, not merely something extrinsic.
Opus istud litteris consignavit sanctus Pater, rogatus a quodam Theophilo, quocum de eodem argumento fuerat ante collocutus; ipsique propterea, quem charissimum fratrem appellat, librum suum nuncupat. In eo autem, judice Photio, ut modo audivimus, servata sensuum simplicitas ac vetustas; genus vero dicendi clarum in primis ac perspicuum, nec non interpretationi congruum. Caeterum epocha hujus libri prorsus est incerta, neque ex adjunctis colligi potest quo tempore S. Pater hunc tractatum composuerit.
The holy Father committed that work to writing when asked by a certain Theophilus, with whom he had previously conversed on the same subject; and to him therefore, whom he calls his dearest brother, he dedicates his book. And in it, in the judgement of Photius, as we have just heard, the simplicity and antiquity of the thoughts are preserved, while the style of speaking is above all clear and perspicuous, and well suited to exposition. For the rest, the date of this book is altogether uncertain, nor can it be gathered from the circumstances at what time the holy Father composed this treatise.
Analysis hujus tractatus.
Analysis of this treatise.
Sanctus Hippolytus librum De Antichristo composuit occasione colloquii quod habuit cum quodam Theophilo, cui illum dicavit, quemque charissimum suum fratrem appellat. Monet autem inprimis Theophilum, ne scripta sua cum infidelibus,
St Hippolytus composed the book On Antichrist on the occasion of a conversation which he had with a certain Theophilus, to whom he dedicated it, and whom he calls his dearest brother. And first of all he warns Theophilus not to share his writings with unbelievers,
Editors' notes and page, col. 289
Footnotes
(91) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 289
Combefis. in notis ad cap. V, infra pag. 419, apud Galland., tom. II.
Combefis, in the notes on ch. V, below, p. 419, in Gallandi, vol. II.
(printed under page 155)
(92) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 289
Fabric. Hippolyt., tom. I Opp., p. 2, not. *.
Fabricius, Hippolytus, vol. I of the Works, p. 2, note *.
(printed under page 155)
(93) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 289
Galland., tom. II Biblioth. PP., in Prolegomen., pag. XLV.
Gallandi, Bibliotheca veterum Patrum, vol. II, in the Prolegomena, p. xlv.
(printed under page 155)
(94) ‹anchor: quodam Theophilo› · call in col 289
Putat post Fabricium Ceillierius tom. II Hist. génér. des auteurs, pag. 334, not. d, fortasse hunc Theophilum eumdem fuisse, quem alloquitur Methodius episcopus Tyri, aequalis Hippolyto, in suo tractatu De resurrectione: Vos enim sermonum nostrorum judices, teque imprimis, optime Theophile. Apud Epiphan. haeres. 64, p. 540.
Ceillier, following Fabricius, Histoire générale des auteurs, vol. II, p. 334, note d, thinks this Theophilus was perhaps the same one whom Methodius, bishop of Tyre and contemporary of Hippolytus, addresses in his treatise On the Resurrection: "For you are the judges of our discourses, and you above all, excellent Theophilus." In Epiphanius, Heresy 64, p. 540.
(printed under page 155)
Page
- running head: 289 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A quam Photio; B Antichristum Christo; C excludit, ne; D de
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: quam Photio (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
qui quae ignorant, blasphemant, sed cum fidelibus in sanctitate, justitia et timore Dei viventibus, communicet. Antequam vero ad tractatum De Antichristo pergat S. Hippolytus, prius duas alias quaestiones sibi solvendas proponit: scilicet quomodo Dei Verbum ante incarnationem se prophetis manifestaverit? et dein quomodo idem Verbum Dei per incarnationem factum sit servus Dei? Primam quaestionem solvit ducta comparatione ab instrumento musico, aitque prophetas esse instar chordarum, et Verbum veluti plectrum, cujus motu atque impulsu incognita prophetae aliis hominibus annuntiarent. Quantum ad alteram quaestionem, respondet Theophilo S. Hippolytus: Quia Verbum suam misericordiam, et quod minime acceptor est personarum, per omnes sanctos ostendit, illuminans illos atque componens velut peritus medicus ad ea quae ad nostram conducant salutem, quippe cum non nesciat humanam infirmitatem. Ac quidem ignorantes studet edocere: errantes vero ad veram suam viam convertit. Atque his quidem, qui fide quaerunt, facile invenitur; his autem, qui mundis oculis et casto corde ostium pulsare desiderant, confestim aperit. Nullum enim suorum servorum rejicit, quasi divinorum mysteriorum indignum. Non divitem paupere pluris facit, neque pauperem pro ejus tenuitate spernit. Non barbaro exprobrat, nec eunuchum quasi non virum ablegat. Non odit feminam ob primae originis inobedientiam, nec virum ob transgressionis reatum deturbat; sed omnes vult, omnesque salvare desiderat. Omnes Dei filios praestare vult, sanctosque omnes in unum hominem perfectum vocat; nam et unus Dei Filius est, cujus etiam nos munere per Spiritum S. adepti regenerationem, in unum perfectum ac caelestem hominem omnes occurrere optamus. Postea paucis exponit quomodo Verbum Dei, licet purissimus spiritus, in utero Virginis sit incarnatum; atque concludit, quod Verbum carni nostrae mortali unitum fuerit, ut nostrum corpus redderet incorruptibile, hominem perditum salvaret. Adjungit quaedam de passione Domini nostri Jesu Christi, putatque aliquam illius invenire similitudinem in arte textoris.
who blaspheme the things of which they are ignorant, but with the faithful who live in holiness, justice, and the fear of God. Before, however, St Hippolytus proceeds to the treatise On Antichrist, he first proposes to himself two other questions to be solved: namely, how the Word of God manifested Himself to the prophets before the incarnation, and then how the same Word of God through the incarnation became a servant of God. The first question he solves by drawing a comparison from a musical instrument, and says that the prophets are like the strings, and the Word like the plectrum, by whose movement and impulse the prophets announced unknown things to other men. As to the second question, St Hippolytus answers Theophilus: Because the Word shows His mercy, and that He is by no means an acceptor of persons, through all the saints, illuminating them and disposing them like a skilled physician for those things which conduce to our salvation, inasmuch as He is not ignorant of human infirmity. And the ignorant indeed He strives to teach thoroughly, while the erring He converts to His true way. And by those indeed who seek in faith, He is easily found; and to those who with pure eyes and a chaste heart desire to knock at the door, He straightway opens. For He rejects none of His servants as unworthy of the divine mysteries. He does not value the rich man more than the poor, nor despise the poor man for his poverty. He does not upbraid the barbarian, nor send away the eunuch as not a man. He does not hate the woman on account of the disobedience of her first origin, nor cast down the man on account of the guilt of his transgression; but He wills all, and desires to save all. He wills to make all sons of God, and calls all the saints into one perfect man; for there is also one Son of God, by Whose gift we also, having obtained regeneration through the Holy Spirit, all desire to come together into one perfect and heavenly man. Afterwards he sets forth in a few words how the Word of God, although a most pure spirit, was incarnate in the womb of the Virgin; and he concludes that the Word was united to our mortal flesh in order that He might render our body incorruptible and save lost man. He subjoins certain things concerning the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, and thinks that he finds some likeness of it in the art of the weaver.
His praemissis tractatum De Antichristo incipit, de quo ex Scripturis ostendit, atque sequentes quaestiones solvere conatur: Nimirum quis et qualis Antichristi adventus, qua aetate ac tempore revelabitur iniquus ille; undenam, et ex qua tribu, quod illi nomen, quomodo populum in errorem inducet, quam item sanctis tribulationem inferet. Dein explicat
Having premised these things, he begins the treatise On Antichrist, concerning whom he shows from the Scriptures and endeavours to solve the following questions: Namely, what and of what sort the coming of Antichrist will be, in what age and time that wicked one will be revealed, whence and from what tribe, what his name is, how he will lead the people into error, and likewise what tribulation he will bring upon the saints. Next he explains
Editors' notes and page, col. 290
Footnotes
(95) ‹anchor: Dei viventibus, communicet› · call in col 290
Hippolyt. lib. De Antichristo, num. 1.
Hippolytus, the book On Antichrist, no. 1.
(printed under page 155)
(96) ‹anchor: aliis hominibus annuntiarent› · call in col 290
«Hi namque Patres Spiritu prophetiae aptati, digneque ab ipso Verbo honorati, quo nimirum velut organa in seipsis unitum semper Verbum tanquam plectrum haberent, cujus nutu atque afflatu quae Deus vellet, haec prophetae annuntiabant.» Hippolyt., lib. cit., num. 2.
"For these Fathers, fitted by the Spirit of prophecy and worthily honoured by the Word Himself, so that, like instruments, they had the Word always united within them as a plectrum, by whose nod and breath the prophets announced what God willed." Hippolytus, the book cited, no. 2.
(printed under page 155)
(97) ‹anchor: omnes occurrere optamus› · call in col 290
Idem, l. c., num. 3.
The same, at the place cited, no. 3.
(printed under page 155)
(98) ‹anchor: in arte textoris› · call in col 290
Idem, l. c., n. 4.
The same, at the place cited, no. 4.
(printed under page 155)
(99) ‹anchor: tribulationem inferet› · call in col 290
Idem, l. c., num. 5 - 23.
The same, at the place cited, nos. 5–23.
(printed under page 155)
Page
- running head: SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 290
- marginal letters: A qui quae ignorant; B personarum, per; C Omnes Dei filios; D de quo ex
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: qui quae ignorant (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: expli-[cat]
visiones Nabuchodonosoris et Danielis hoc modo: « Quia igitur quae sic arcana sensu dicta sunt, nonnullis videntur captu difficilia, eorum nihil abscondemus, ut intelligant, qui sana mente praediti sunt. Leaenam enim dicendo ascendentem e mari, Babyloniorum regnum in mundo significavit, quod hujus simulacri erat caput aureum. Quod autem dicit: Alae ejus quasi aquilae, quia exaltatus est rex Nabuchodonosor, et adversus Deum elatus. Dum ait: Evulsae sunt alae ejus, quia ejus ablata est gloria; fuit enim ejectus e regno suo. Dicendo autem: Cor hominis datum est ei et super pedes hominis stetit, quia ductus poenitentia est, ipse seipsum agnoscens, quod homo esset, et dedit gloriam Deo. Post leaenam ergo secundum animal vidit urso simile, quod sunt Persae... Dicendo autem tres costae (sive ordines) in ore ejus, tres gentes significavit, Persas, Medos et Babylonios, idque ostendit argentum adjunctum auro in simulacro. Sequitur tertia bestia pardus, nempe Graeci; post Persas enim Alexander Macedo rerum potitus est debellato Dario, qui in simulacro aeris specie ostensus est. Dicendo autem quatuor alas volucris, apertissime docuit quomodo Alexandri imperium divisum fuit; dicendo enim quatuor capita, quatuor, qui ex illo surrexerunt reges, memoravit; Alexander enim moriens imperium solidum in quatuor partes divisit. Deinde ait: Bestia quarta terribilis ac stupenda, dentes ejus ferrei, et ungues ejus aenei. Quinam isti, nisi Romani, quod est ferreum, quod nunc stat, manetque imperium, crura enim ejus ferrea; post haec enim quid aliud superat, charissime, praeter vestigia pedum simulacri, et in quibus pars quaedam ferrea, pars vero testea est, commistis inter se speciebus? Per ungues pedum arcano sensu reges ex illo ortum habituros designavit, uti Daniel ait: Cogitabam bestiam, et ecce cornua decem retro eam, inter quae surget minusculus stolo alius, et tria, quae ante ipsum erant, cornua evellet. Quo non aliud, quam Antichristus monstratus est, qui et ipse Judaeorum regnum suscitaturus est: tria cornua per eum evulsa tres reges vocat, Aegypti, Lybiae et Aethiopiae, quos interficiet in belli acie. »
the visions of Nebuchadnezzar and of Daniel in this way: "Because therefore the things which have been spoken thus in a hidden sense seem to some difficult to grasp, we will hide nothing of them, so that those who are endowed with a sound mind may understand. For by saying a lioness coming up from the sea, he signified the kingdom of the Babylonians in the world, which was the golden head of this image. And whereas he says: Her wings were as those of an eagle, this is because King Nebuchadnezzar was exalted and lifted up against God. While he says: Her wings were plucked off, this is because his glory was taken away; for he was cast out from his kingdom. And by saying: A man's heart was given to her, and she stood upon the feet of a man, this is because he was led to repentance, recognizing himself that he was a man, and gave glory to God. After the lioness therefore he saw a second beast like a bear, which are the Persians... And by saying three ribs (or rows) in its mouth, he signified three nations, the Persians, the Medes, and the Babylonians, and the silver joined to the gold in the image shows this. There follows a third beast, a leopard, namely the Greeks; for after the Persians Alexander the Macedonian gained the mastery of affairs when Darius had been vanquished, who in the image was shown under the appearance of brass. And by saying four wings of a bird, he taught most plainly how the empire of Alexander was divided; for by saying four heads, he mentioned the four kings who arose from him; for Alexander when dying divided his whole empire into four parts. Next he says: A fourth beast, terrible and wondrous, its teeth of iron, and its claws of brass. Who are these, if not the Romans, which is the iron empire that now stands and remains—for its legs are of iron; for after these things what else remains, dearest brother, except the soles of the feet of the image, in which a certain part is of iron, and a part of clay, the materials being mingled with one another? By the toes of the feet he designated in a hidden sense the kings who are to arise out of it, as Daniel says: I was considering the beast, and behold ten horns behind it, among which another little shoot shall arise, and shall pluck up three horns which were before it. Whereby none other than Antichrist is shown, who himself also is to raise up the kingdom of the Jews: the three horns plucked up by him he calls three kings, of Egypt, of Libya, and of Ethiopia, whom he will slay in the line of battle."
Eodem fere modo S. Hippolytus somnium Nabuchodonosoris de ingenti ac alta statua, quam Daniel descripsit, interpretatur. Aureum caput, inquit, simulacri, leaenae, « Babylonii erant; humeri et brachia argentea, ursus, Persae et Medi; venter femurque aeneum, pardus, qui ab Alexandro Graeci rerum potiti sunt; crura ferrea, stupenda bestia ac terribilis, Romani, qui nunc rerum potiuntur; vestigia pedum, testa ferrumque, ac decem
In almost the same way St Hippolytus interprets the dream of Nebuchadnezzar concerning the vast and lofty statue which Daniel described. The golden head of the image, the lioness, says he, "were the Babylonians; the silver shoulders and arms, the bear, the Persians and Medes; the brazen belly and thighs, the leopard, the Greeks who from Alexander gained the mastery of affairs; the iron legs, the wondrous and terrible beast, the Romans, who now hold the mastery of affairs; the soles of the feet, clay and iron, and the ten
Editors' notes and page, col. 291
Footnotes
(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 291
Hippolyt. l. c., num. 23 - 28.
Hippolytus, at the place cited, nos. 23–28.
(printed under page 156)
(2) ‹anchor: interpretatur› · call in col 291
Idem, ibid., num. 28.
The same, in the same place, no. 28.
(printed under page 156)
Page
- running head: 291 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S. H
- marginal letters: A cat visiones; B mile, quod sunt; C stat, manetque; D Eodem fere modo
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: cat visiones Nabuchodonosoris (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); margin letter D printed upside down; words split at start and end of column: [expli]cat, de-[cem]
cornua, quae futura sunt regna et imperia; cornu aliud parvum succrescens, quod inter illa numeratur, Antichristus; lapis percutiens conterensque simulacrum, qui terram adimplevit et judicium mundo infert, Christus. »
horns, which are the kingdoms and empires that are to be; another little horn growing up, which is numbered among them, Antichrist; the stone striking and crushing the image, which filled the earth and brings judgement upon the world, Christ."
Praeterea S. Hippolytus, postquam prophetiam Isaiae de interitu Jerusalem cap. I, v. 7, et prophetiam Danielis de simulacro, seu statua antea explicata, item aliam prophetiam Isaiae cap. XLVII, v. 1 et seq., impletam esse quoad majorem partem notavit, ex Apocalypsi sancti Joannis capite XVII et XVIII, Antichristi damnationem fuse describit, quae capita hic sanctus Hippolytus in extenso refert, et demum subdit: Apertissime in his testimoniis sigillatim declaratum est de tormentorum judicio, quae extremis temporibus per tyrannorum, qui tunc erunt, injuriam illam incessura sunt.
Furthermore, St Hippolytus, after noting that the prophecy of Isaiah concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, chap. 1, v. 7, and the prophecy of Daniel concerning the image or statue explained before, and likewise another prophecy of Isaiah, chap. 47, v. 1 and following, have been fulfilled as regards the greater part, describes at length the condemnation of Antichrist from the Apocalypse of St John, chapters 17 and 18, which chapters St Hippolytus here quotes in full, and finally subjoins: Most plainly in these testimonies has declaration been made in detail concerning the judgement of torments which in the last times, on account of the injury of the tyrants who shall then be, are to come upon her.
Postea describit S. Pater, quomodo se Antichristus ut Deum exhibebit populumque ad se congregabit atque persecuturus sit Ecclesiam. Mortem Antichristi tandem statuit post dies regni ipsius mille ducentos et sexaginta. His autem completis docet futuram mundi universi consummationem, judicium extremum, regnumque caelorum.
Afterwards the holy Father describes how Antichrist will exhibit himself as God and gather the people to himself and persecute the Church. Finally he places the death of Antichrist after one thousand two hundred and sixty days of his reign. And when these things are completed, he teaches the future consummation of the whole world, the last judgement, and the kingdom of heaven.
Denique S. Hippolytus suam demonstrationem sequentibus concludit: « Haec tibi paucis exposui, Theophile, ex divinis Scripturis hausta, ut servando fide, quae scripta sunt, prospiciensque futura, inoffensum te Deo ac hominibus serves, exspectans beatam spem et illustrationem Dei et Salvatoris nostri, in qua suscitatis sanctis nostris cum eis laetabitur glorificans Patrem; ipsi gloria in sempiterna saecula saeculorum. Amen. »
Finally St Hippolytus concludes his demonstration with the following words: "These things I have set forth to you in brief, Theophilus, drawn from the divine Scriptures, so that by keeping in faith the things that are written, and foreseeing the things to come, you may keep yourself without offence towards God and men, awaiting the blessed hope and the manifestation of our God and Saviour, in which, having raised up our saints, He will rejoice with them, glorifying the Father; to Him be glory unto everlasting ages of ages. Amen."
ARTICULUS III.
ARTICLE III.
S. HIPPOLYTI OPUSCULUM DE HISTORIA SUSANNAE.
THE SHORT WORK OF ST HIPPOLYTUS ON THE HISTORY OF SUSANNA.
Demonstrationem de Christo et Antichristo excipit opusculum in Susannam, a Combefisio Graece ac Latine vulgatum: hinc vero a Fabricio in suam editionem conjectum: versio autem Latina in Bibliotheca SS. Patrum Lugdunensi repetita. De hujus opusculi integritate nemo jure ambigat, ubi conferat illud cum praecedentis cap. 59. Siquidem utrobique parem Scripturas interpretandi rationem facile agnoscet. His accedit Georgii Syncelli testimonium, qui scriptum hujusmodi perlegisse videtur. Sic enim scribit: « Sacer autem Hippolytus in scripto de Susanna et Daniele, Joachim Joacimi filium, alio nomine Jechoniam, cum tres annos post patrem imperasset, Babylonem cum reliquis translatum; Danielem vero ac tres pueros captivitatis hujus consortes; eum vero
The Demonstration concerning Christ and Antichrist is followed by the short work On Susanna, published in Greek and Latin by Combefis, and thence put by Fabricius into his edition, while the Latin version was repeated in the Lyons Bibliotheca Sanctorum Patrum. Concerning the integrity of this short work no one may justly doubt when he compares it with chap. 59 of the preceding work. Since indeed on both sides he will easily recognize a like method of interpreting the Scriptures. To these things is added the testimony of George Syncellus, who seems to have read through a writing of this sort. For thus he writes: "And the sacred Hippolytus in his writing on Susanna and Daniel says that Jehoiachin the son of Jehoiakim, called by another name Jeconiah, after he had reigned three years after his father, was carried away to Babylon with the rest, and that Daniel and the three youths were sharers in this captivity; and that he
Editors' notes and page, col. 292
Footnotes
(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 292 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Idem, ibid., l. c. num. 43.
The same, in the same place, at the place cited, no. 43.
(printed under page 156)
(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 292 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Idem ib., num. 52.
The same, in the same place, no. 52.
(printed under page 156)
(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 292 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Id. ibid., num. 54.
The same, in the same place, no. 54.
(printed under page 156)
(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 292 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Id. ibid., num. 56 et seq.
The same, in the same place, no. 56 and following.
(printed under page 156)
(7) ‹anchor: regnumque caelorum› · call in col 292
Id. ibid., num. 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66.
The same, in the same place, nos. 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66.
(printed under page 156)
(8) ‹anchor: Latine vulgatum› · call in col 292
Combefis., Auctar. noviss., tom. I, pag. 50-56.
Combefis, Auctarium novissimum, vol. I, pp. 50–56.
(printed under page 156)
(9) ‹anchor: editionem conjectum› · call in col 292
Fabr., Hippolyt. tom. I Opp., pag. 273 et seq.
Fabricius, Hippolytus, vol. I of the Works, p. 273 and following.
(printed under page 156)
(10) ‹anchor: Lugdunensi repetita› · call in col 292
Bibl. PP. Lugdun., tom. XXVII, pag. 62.
Bibliotheca Patrum of Lyons, vol. XXVII, p. 62.
(printed under page 156)
(11) ‹anchor: Sic enim scribit› · call in col 292
Chronograph. pag. 218, al. 174.
Chronography, p. 218, otherwise 174.
(printed under page 156)
Page
- running head: SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 292
- marginal letters: A cem cornua; B quae extremis; C tura, inoffensum; D 59. Siquidem
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: cem cornua (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [de]cem
Susannae conjugem dicit: nec aliena est a veritate sententia. »
calls the husband of Susanna: nor is the opinion foreign to the truth."
Verum ut hac de re plenius adhuc edoceamur, cl. editorem ita loquentem audiamus: « Quod, inquit, repraesento Hippolyti opus de Susannae historia (non ipsum forte integrum, sed quale auctor Catenae Regiae in Scripturam, ejusmodi catenarum licentia quasi per electa suae expositioni inseruit) ipsum videtur, quod de Daniele inscripsit Hieronymus, ac Photius alteri ejus De Antichristo lucubrationi jungit. Simplici allegoria sic Susannam in Ecclesiae typum assumit, ut ejus temporis Ecclesiae statum nonnullosque obiter ritus ecclesiasticos gnaviter aperiat: de baptismi unctione, de ejus ritu solemni in Pascha, per cujus occasionem praecipue in Ecclesiam saevirent Judaei et ethnici; quod forte molestius habebant fieri novos Christianos, quam esse jam veteres. Sic saepe in Actis martyrum videmus, qui recens ad Christi castra transierunt, ac martyrum opera reverentur, ipsos ad poenas vocatos; cum innumerabiles alii Christiani essent, quibus parceretur et qui vix latere judices possent. Extra enim Diocletianeam Romae persecutionem, vix unquam in Christianos, qui jam plures essent et populum facerent, ac Ecclesiam, sic universe saevitum est, ut omnis ipsa multitudo una quasi furentis mucronis quaereretur victima. » Haec Combefisius.
But that we may be instructed still more fully concerning this matter, let us hear the illustrious editor speaking thus: "The work of Hippolytus on the history of Susanna which I present," he says, "(not perhaps the whole work itself, but such as the author of the Royal Catena on Scripture, by the licence of catenae of this kind, inserted as if by selections into his own exposition) seems to be the very one which Jerome entitled On Daniel, and which Photius joins to his other treatise On Antichrist. By a simple allegory he so takes Susanna as a type of the Church that he diligently unfolds the state of the Church of that time and in passing several ecclesiastical rites: concerning the anointing of baptism, concerning its solemn rite at Pascha, on the occasion of which the Jews and heathens chiefly raged against the Church; because perhaps they took it more ill that new Christians were being made than that old ones already existed. Thus we often see in the Acts of the martyrs that those who have recently gone over to the camp of Christ, and reverence the works of the martyrs, are themselves called to punishments, while there were innumerable other Christians who were spared and who could scarcely lie hid from the judges. For apart from the Diocletianic persecution at Rome, scarcely ever was there such universal rage against Christians, who were already many and formed a people and a Church, that the whole multitude itself was sought as if one victim of a raging sword." Thus Combefis.
Brevis hic commentarius historiam Susannae allegorice exponit. S. Hippolytus dicit, quod Susanna Ecclesiae gerebat figuram; Joachim vero vir ejus, Christi. Hortus seu pomarium vocatio sanctorum, qui tanquam fructiferae arbores in Ecclesia plantati sunt. Babylon mundus est. Duo seniores duos populos figurare noscuntur, qui Ecclesiae insidias struere non cessabant; nempe Judaeos et gentiles. Cur autem historia Susannae in fine libri Danielis referatur, cum tamen res nota et contestata sit, quod ante omnia alia a propheta relata facta contigerit? Respondet S. Hippolytus: Sic scriptorum sacrorum moribus comparatum esse, ut non pauca inverso ordine litterarum monumentis consignata tradant. Nam etiam in prophetis quasdam visiones offendimus prius conscriptas, ac rursus in postremis relatas, quae primo contigerunt.
This brief commentary expounds the history of Susanna allegorically. St Hippolytus says that Susanna bore the figure of the Church, and Joachim her husband, that of Christ. The garden or orchard is the calling of the saints, who have been planted like fruitful trees in the Church. Babylon is the world. The two elders are known to figure the two peoples who did not cease to lay snares for the Church, namely the Jews and the Gentiles. Why then is the history of Susanna related at the end of the book of Daniel, when nevertheless it is a known and attested matter that it happened before all the other deeds related by the prophet? St Hippolytus answers: It is so ordered by the customs of the sacred writers that they hand down not a few things consigned to literary monuments in inverted order. For even in the prophets we find certain visions written down earlier, and again related among the last things, which happened at the first
Editors' notes and page, col. 293
Footnotes
(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 293
Combefis., l. c. pag. 63.
Combefis, at the place cited, p. 63.
(printed under page 157)
(13) ‹anchor: Judaeos et gentiles› · call in col 293
S. Hippolyt. in Susannam.
St Hippolytus, On Susanna.
(printed under page 157)
(14) ‹anchor: Respondet S. Hippolytus› · call in col 293
Idem ibidem, ab initio.
The same, in the same place, from the beginning.
(printed under page 157)
Page
- running head: 293 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPO
- marginal letters: A Susannae conjugem; C legorice exponit.; D ac rursus in
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Susannae conjugem dicit (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: conti-[gerunt]
- other: the word contigerunt. was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 294
Id vero peculiari Spiritus numine ac consilio fiebat, ne diabolus intelligeret quae prophetis in parabolis dicta erant, ac denuo ad perdendum rursus hominem laqueos tenderet. Haec sententia proxime accedit ad illam, quam S. Hieronymus divo Ignatio, cur B. V. Maria S. Josepho desponsata fuerit, attribuit.
. And that was done by the peculiar will and counsel of the Spirit, lest the devil should understand the things that had been spoken by the prophets in parables, and should anew spread snares again to destroy man. This opinion comes very close to that which St Jerome attributes to St Ignatius, as to why the Blessed Virgin Mary was espoused to St Joseph.
Caeterum parvum hoc opusculum nihil divo Hippolyto indignum continet; ipsum etiam tempus, quo compositum fuerat, perbelle cum saeculo hujus S. Patris concordat. Videmus enim Judaeos et gentiles, quemadmodum hic auctor adnotavit, conspirantes adversus Ecclesiam, accusantes Christianos, quod contra Caesarum decreta agant, proptereaque ad tribunalia adductos ac morte damnatos; haec autem persecutionis adjuncta ad initium et medium saeculi tertii observare est. Tandem auctores Historiae litterariae Galliarum regni animadvertunt verisimile esse, illam parvam expositionem fuisse homiliam ab Hippolyto ad populum dictam.
Moreover, this little work contains nothing unworthy of St Hippolytus; the very time also at which it had been composed agrees very well with the century of this holy Father. For we see the Jews and the Gentiles, just as this author noted, conspiring against the Church, accusing the Christians because they act against the decrees of the Caesars, and on that account brought before the tribunals and condemned to death; and these circumstances of persecution are to be observed at the beginning and middle of the third century. Finally, the authors of the Literary History of the Kingdom of the Gauls observe that it is probable that that small exposition was a homily delivered by Hippolytus to the people.
ARTICULUS IV.
ARTICLE IV.
DE TRACTATU QUI INSCRIBITUR « DEMONSTRATIO ADVERSUS JUDAEOS. »
ON THE TREATISE WHICH IS ENTITLED "DEMONSTRATION AGAINST THE JEWS."
Quae tertio sequitur Demonstratio adversus Judaeos, designata existimatur in laterculo Hippolyti lapideo, ubi linea prima hae litterae comparent ΙΟΥϹ; id est, ut nonnullis visum, Ἀποδείξεις πρὸς τοὺς Ἰουδαίους. Varias virorum eruditorum conjecturas exposuit V. C. Fabricius tom. I Opp., p. 80. Utut sit de laterculi inscriptione, nihil in opusculo occurrit quod sit Hippolyto indignum, nihil quod illius aetati non congruat. Praeterea laudatur passim ab auctore sub Salomonis nomine Sapientiae liber: quod quidem Irenaei discipulum in primis decet, ut viris doctis animadversum. Accedit auctoritas veteris codicis, unde versionem suam adornavit Franciscus Turrianus. Hinc minime audiendus Basnagius, qui, ut duo praecedentia Hippolyti scripta tanquam fictitia respuit, sic etiam istud Hippolyto suppositum ducit. Sed superciliosum censorem dimittamus, sibique uni sapiat; qui nimirum ne unum quidem verbum proferat, quo saltem significet cur ita demum sentiat. Turriani versionem primum edidit Possevinus, deinde Imbonatus; postremo Fabricius in priore Hippolyti
The Demonstration against the Jews, which follows in the third place, is considered to be designated in the stone catalogue of Hippolytus, where in the first line these letters appear, IOYS; that is, as has seemed to some, Demonstrations against the Jews. The illustrious Fabricius has set forth the various conjectures of learned men, vol. I of the Works, p. 80. However it may be concerning the inscription of the catalogue, nothing occurs in the little work which is unworthy of Hippolytus, nothing which does not agree with his age. Besides, the book of Wisdom is cited passim by the author under the name of Solomon: which indeed especially befits a disciple of Irenaeus, as has been observed by learned men. Added to this is the authority of an ancient codex, from which Francis Turrianus prepared his version. Hence Basnage is by no means to be listened to, who, just as he rejected the two preceding writings of Hippolytus as fictitious, so also considers that this one was falsely attributed to Hippolytus. But let us dismiss the supercilious censor, and let him be wise for himself alone; since indeed he brings forward not even a single word by which he may at least indicate why he finally thinks thus. Possevinus first published the version of Turrianus, then Imbonatus; lastly Fabricius in the prior volume of his Hippolytus;
Editors' notes and page, col. 294
Footnotes
(15) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 294 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
«Hoc nunc quoque in Ecclesia impleri invenias. Cum enim duo populi consenserint ut quosdam de Ecclesia perdant, diem aptum observant; ingressique in domum Dei cunctis ibi orantibus, Deumque laudantibus, apprehensos quosdam trahunt, tenentque dicentes: Venite, idemque ipsi ac nos sentite, ac diis cultum adhibete; quod si nolueritis, testimonium adversum vos dicemus. Eos autem qui noluerint, ad tribunalia adducunt et accusant, velut qui agant contra decretum Caesaris, ac morte damnant...» Et paulo infra: «Ecclesia enim nodum a Judaeis affligitur ac angustias patitur, verum etiam a gentibus.» Hippol. in Daniel. et Susann., tom. I, p. 276.
"You may find this fulfilled now also in the Church. For when the two peoples have agreed to destroy some members of the Church, they watch for a suitable day; and entering the house of God while all are praying there and praising God, they seize some, drag them off and hold them, saying: Come, think as we do, and pay worship to the gods; and if you refuse, we will bear witness against you. And those who refuse they bring before the tribunals and accuse them as men acting against the decree of Caesar, and condemn them to death..." And a little below: "For the Church is afflicted and suffers distress not only [nodum, so printed] from the Jews, but also from the Gentiles." Hippolytus, On Daniel and Susanna, vol. I, p. 276.
(printed under page 157)
(16) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 294 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Hist. littér. de la France, tom. I, part. I, p. 369.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, part I, p. 369.
(printed under page 157)
(17) ‹anchor: ab auctore› · call in col 294
Hippolyt., adv. Jud., cap. IX et X.
Hippolytus, Against the Jews, chs. IX and X.
(printed under page 157)
(18) ‹anchor: animadversum› · call in col 294
Hist. littér. de la France, tom. I, part. I, p. 371.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, part I, p. 371.
(printed under page 157)
(19) ‹anchor: suppositum ducit› · call in col 294
Basnag., Animadv. ad Thesaur. Canis., tom. I, p. 9 et seq. Judice Cl. Dupinio pag. 177 Lat. edit. Bibliothecae auctorum, Demonstratio contra Judaeos alicujus homiliae, aut alius cujusdam operis fragmentum est. Utrum vero sit Hippolyti, eidem incertum videtur.
Basnage, Observations on Canisius's Thesaurus, vol. I, p. 9 and following. In the judgement of the distinguished Dupin, p. 177 of the Latin edition of the Bibliothèque des auteurs, the Demonstration against the Jews is a fragment of some homily or of some other work. Whether it is Hippolytus's seems to him uncertain.
(printed under page 157)
(20) ‹anchor: edidit Possevinus› · call in col 294
Possevin., Apparat. sac., t. I, p. 763-765.
Possevino, Apparatus sacer, vol. I, pp. 763–765.
(printed under page 157)
(21) ‹anchor: deinde Imbonatus› · call in col 294
Imbonat., Bibl. Lat. Hebr., p. 74-76.
Imbonati, Bibliotheca Latino-Hebraica, pp. 74–76.
(printed under page 157)
Page
- running head: IPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 294
- marginal letters: A gerunt. Id vero; B autem persecutionis; C currit quod sit; D bonatus (21); postremo
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: gerunt. Id vero (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); ARTICULUS IV.; word split at start of column: [conti]gerunt; word split at end of column: Hippo-[lyti]
sui volumine; qui postea codicis Vaticani apographum nactus, quod cum eo communicavit Montfauconius V. C., in posteriore Graece et Latine eodem Turriano interprete opus vulgavit. Idem cl. editor suspicatur laudatam Demonstrationem adversus Judaeos esse particulam commentariorum S. Hippolyti in Psalmos, cum sit veluti paraphrasis Psalmi LXVIII, juxta Hebraeos LXIX, in quo passio Christo a Judaeis inferenda praenuntiatur a Davide regio psalte.
who afterwards, having obtained a transcript of the Vatican codex, which the illustrious Montfaucon communicated to him, published the work in Greek and Latin in the latter volume with the same Turrianus as translator. The same illustrious editor suspects that the aforesaid Demonstration against the Jews is a small part of the commentaries of St Hippolytus on the Psalms, since it is as it were a paraphrase of Psalm 68, according to the Hebrews 69, in which the passion to be inflicted on Christ by the Jews is foretold by David the royal psalmist.
ARTICULUS V.
ARTICLE V.
DE LIBRO « ADVERSUS GRAECOS, SEU CONTRA PLATONEM DE CAUSA UNIVERSI. »
ON THE BOOK "AGAINST THE GREEKS, OR AGAINST PLATO ON THE CAUSE OF THE UNIVERSE."
Quarto loco memorandum occurrit insigne fragmentum ex libro adversus Graecos, qui inscribitur adversus Platonem, de causa universi; quem quidem in laterculo lapideo memoratum videas, πρὸς Ἕλληνας καὶ πρὸς Πλάτωνα, ἢ καὶ περὶ τοῦ παντός. Plura de eo erudite Fabricius. Scripti hujus Hippolytei praestantia duo excerpta, et quidem editis emendatiora, exstant in Parallelis Damascenicis Rupefucaldinis pag. 755 et 789, quibuscum propterea editum Fabricianum contulit cl. Gallandius:
In the fourth place there occurs to be mentioned a notable fragment from the book against the Greeks, which is entitled Against Plato, on the Cause of the Universe; which indeed you may see commemorated in the stone catalogue, Against the Greeks and against Plato, or also On the Universe. Fabricius writes more about it learnedly. Two excellent excerpts of this Hippolytean writing, and indeed more correct than the published ones, are extant in the La Rochefoucauld Damascene Parallels, pp. 755 and 789, with which therefore the illustrious Gallandi collated the Fabrician edition:
Quandoquidem vero de hujus operis auctore varia tum veterum, tum recentiorum circumfertur opinio, in medium adducere placet Lequienii judicium; cujus quidem viri doctissimi sententiam libenter amplectimur. Sic igitur ille: « Lucubrationis hujus Περὶ τοῦ παντός, De universo, excerptum aliud habetur in his Parallelis Rupefucaldinis, litt. α, tit. 71, ubi Meletio Antiocheno tribuitur. Photius hoc idem opus assignatum fuisse narrat sanctis Justino, Irenaeo et Caio Romanae Ecclesiae presbytero. Josephi quidem non esse fetum inde certissime constare arbitror, quod ambae istae laciniae, imo totum fragmentum, quod Hoeschelius in notis ad Photium Graece edidit, ac Graece Latineque Stephanus Le Moyne inter Varia sacra, Christianum, non Judaeum auctorem prodant. Nam Christum esse Deum Verbum docet, imo Deum factum hominem, Θεὸν ἐνανθρωπήσαντα. Evangelicas insuper locutiones et sententias usurpat. Sic enim de Deo Verbo carne facto loquitur: Τούτῳ ὁ Πατὴρ πᾶσαν κρίσιν δέδωκε, Huic Pater omne judicium dedit: quemadmodum scilicet Joan. V, 22, legerat: Neque enim Pater judicat quemquam, sed omne judicium dedit Filio. Itemque ubi dicit: Χάος γὰρ βαθὺ καὶ μέγα ἀνὰ μέσον ἐστήρικται, ὥστε μὴ δίκαιον συμπαθήσαντα προσδέξασθαι, μήτε ἄδικον τολμήσαντα διελθεῖν. Chaos profundum et magnum inter utrosque firmatum est, ut neque justus illos miserationis affectu recipiat, neque injustus ad hos audeat transire;
Since however a varied opinion both of the ancients and of more recent writers is circulated concerning the author of this work, it pleases us to bring forward the judgement of Le Quien; the opinion of which most learned man indeed we gladly embrace. Thus therefore he writes: "Of this treatise On the Universe, Περὶ τοῦ παντός, another excerpt is found in these La Rochefoucauld Parallels, letter α, title 71, where it is attributed to Meletius of Antioch. Photius relates that this same work was assigned to Saints Justin, Irenaeus, and Caius, presbyter of the Roman Church. That it is certainly not the offspring of Josephus I consider to be most surely established from the fact that both those fragments, nay the whole fragment which Hoeschel published in Greek in his notes on Photius, and Stephen Le Moyne in Greek and Latin among his Varia sacra, betray a Christian, not a Jewish author. For he teaches that Christ is God the Word, nay God made man, Θεὸν ἐνανθρωπήσαντα. Moreover, he uses evangelical expressions and sentences. For thus he speaks of God the Word made flesh: To Him the Father has given all judgement, Huic Pater omne judicium dedit: just as namely he had read in John 5:22: For neither does the Father judge any man, but He has given all judgement to the Son. And likewise where he says: For a deep and great chasm has been fixed between, so that neither can a righteous man who feels compassion receive them, nor an unrighteous man who dares pass through. A deep and great chasm has been fixed between both, so that neither may a righteous man receive them with an affection of pity, nor an unrighteous man dare to cross over to these
Editors' notes and page, col. 295
Footnotes
(22) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 295
Fabricius, Delect. argum. et Syllab. script. eccl., p. 62 et seq.
Fabricius, Delectus argumentorum et Syllabus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum, p. 62 and following.
(printed under page 158)
(23) ‹anchor: Sic igitur ille› · call in col 295
Le Quien., Opp. Damascen. tom. II, p. 789.
Le Quien, Works of John Damascene, vol. II, p. 789.
(printed under page 158)
(24) ‹anchor: Photius› · call in col 295
Phot., Bibl. cod. XLVIII.
Photius, Bibliotheca, codex 48.
(printed under page 158)
Page
- running head: 295 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A lyti sui volumine;; B adversus Platonem,; C brationis hujus; D de Deo Verbo
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek phrases and quotations); editors' matter: lyti sui volumine (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); ARTICULUS V.; word split at start of column: [Hippo]lyti; word split at end of column: trans-[ire]
- other: the word transire; was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 296
quid aliud sibi vult, nisi quod Lucae XVI, 26 Dominus pronuntiaverat: Et in his omnibus inter nos et vos chaos magnum firmatum est, ἐστήρικται, ut hi, qui volunt hinc transire ad vos, non possint, neque inde huc transmeare?
; what else does he mean, save what in Luke 16:26 the Lord had pronounced: And in all these things between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, ἐστήρικται, so that they who wish to cross from here to you cannot, nor cross over from there to here?
« Eos dedita opera non refello, qui tractatum istum Caio, Justino, Irenaeo, Origeni et Meletio ascripserunt. Satius sit nobis, in inscriptione lapidea vetustissima, quae etiamnum exstat, inter opera Hippolyti Portuensis episcopi recenseri librum πρὸς Πλάτωνα, ἢ περὶ τοῦ παντός, ad (adversus) Platonem, seu de universo, ut alterum illius parentem non quaeramus. Nimirum accidisse oportet ut librarius, cum in codice, quem prae oculis habebat, primas duntaxat nominis Hippolyti litteras Graecas legeret, Ἱππο, deletis vel compendio suppressis aliis, hinc arbitratus sit, fuisse scriptum Ἰωσίππου, unde opus Josepho restituendum intulerit. Auctorem porro non Platonis opiniones propugnasse, sed potius impugnasse, adeoque legendum esse (in Parallelis et in operis inscriptione) κατὰ Πλάτωνος, et non κατὰ Πλάτωνα, jam viri docti observarunt. Et certe in his fragmentis Platonicorum philosophorum de inferno fabulae ac naeniae dedita opera refelluntur explodunturque, horum loco substitutis, quae Christiana fides tradit, si pauca demas, quae a communi catholicorum doctrina discrepant. Photius observat opus istud in duas partes distributum fuisse, ἐν δυσὶ λογιδίοις· quin etiam in quibusdam codicibus ejusmodi inscriptionem habuisse, περὶ τῆς τοῦ παντὸς αἰτίας, de causa universi, et in aliis περὶ τῆς τοῦ παντὸς οὐσίας, de substantia universi. Plura videsis apud eumdem Photium. » Hactenus V. C.
"I do not purposely refute those who have ascribed that treatise to Caius, Justin, Irenaeus, Origen, and Meletius. Let it suffice for us that in a most ancient stone inscription, which is still extant, among the works of Hippolytus bishop of Portus is listed the book πρὸς Πλάτωνα, ἢ περὶ τοῦ παντός, To (Against) Plato, or On the Universe, so that we need not seek another parent for it. Doubtless it must have happened that the copyist, when in the codex which he had before his eyes he read only the first Greek letters of the name of Hippolytus, Ἱππο, the others having been effaced or suppressed by abbreviation, hence supposed that there had been written Ἰωσίππου, whence he inferred that the work was to be restored to Josephus. Moreover, that the author did not defend the opinions of Plato, but rather attacked them, and that therefore one must read (in the Parallels and in the title of the work) κατὰ Πλάτωνος, and not κατὰ Πλάτωνα, learned men have already observed. And certainly in these fragments the fables and dirges of the Platonic philosophers concerning hell are purposely refuted and exploded, there being substituted in their place the things which the Christian faith hands down, if you except a few things which differ from the common doctrine of Catholics. Photius observes that that work was divided into two parts, ἐν δυσὶ λογιδίοις; nay, even that in certain codices it had a title of this kind, περὶ τῆς τοῦ παντὸς αἰτίας, On the Cause of the Universe, and in others περὶ τῆς τοῦ παντὸς οὐσίας, On the Substance of the Universe. You may see more in the same Photius." Thus far the illustrious man.
Neque hic praeterire fas est locum ex eodem opere De causa universi excerptum, qui non exstat in eo fragmento, quod hodie superest. Nobis illum servavit Joannes Philoponus, licet ipse, uti et Joannes Zonaras perperam, ut vidimus, Josepho ascribant. Est autem ejusmodi: Τὸ οὖν, γενηθήτω στερέωμα ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ ὕδατος, οὐ μεταξὺ λέγει τοῦ κάτω ὕδατος τὴν τοῦ στερεώματος γενέσθαι φύσιν, ὡς Ἰώσηπος ὁ Ἑβραῖος ἐν τῷ Περὶ τοῦ παντὸς αἰτίας συγγράμματι βούλεται, εἰς τρία, λέγων, διηρῆσθαι τὸ ὕδωρ, καὶ τὸ μὲν τρίτον αὐτοῦ εἰς γένεσιν συμπαγῆναι τοῦ στερεώματος, τὸ δὲ τρίτον ἐναπομεῖναι κάτω, τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν τρίτον ἐν τοῖς νώτοις εἰς ὕψος συνανακουφισθῆναι τῷ στερεώματι. Hoc est: « Illud igitur, Fiat firmamentum in medio aquae, non arguit naturam firmamenti exsistere in medio aquae hujus inferioris, ut Josephus Hebraeus vult in libro, quem conscripsit De causa universi, dicens aquam tripartitam esse, et unam quidem tertiam ejus in firmamenti generationem coaluisse; alteram vero tertiam inferius remansisse; denique residuam
Nor is it right to pass over here a passage excerpted from the same work On the Cause of the Universe, which is not extant in that fragment which survives today. John Philoponus has preserved it for us, although he himself, as also John Zonaras, wrongly, as we have seen, ascribes it to Josephus. Now it is of this kind: Therefore the saying, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the water (Gen. 1:6), does not say that the nature of the firmament came into being in the midst of the water below, as Josephus the Hebrew maintains in his treatise On the Cause of the Universe, saying that the water was divided into three parts, and that one third of it was compacted for the generation of the firmament, and another third remained below, and the remaining third was lifted up on high together with the firmament upon its back. That is: "That saying therefore, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the water, does not prove that the nature of the firmament exists in the midst of this lower water, as Josephus the Hebrew maintains in the book which he wrote On the Cause of the Universe, saying that the water is tripartite, and that one third of it indeed coalesced for the generation of the firmament; and another third remained below; finally that the remaining
Editors' notes and page, col. 296
Footnotes
(25) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 296 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Scribitur Ἰώσηπος et Ἰώσηππος, sed et Ἰώσιπος ac Ἰώσιππος.
It is written Ἰώσηπος and Ἰώσηππος, but also Ἰώσιπος and Ἰώσιππος.
(printed under page 158)
(26) ‹anchor: Joannes Zonaras› · call in col 296
Zonar. in Annal. lib. VI, § 9, pag. 267, al. 201.
Zonaras, in the Annals, book VI, § 9, p. 267, otherwise 201.
(printed under page 158)
(27) ‹anchor: Est autem ejusmodi› · call in col 296
Philopon., De mundi creat. lib. III, cap. 16, p. 140.
Philoponus, On the Creation of the World, book III, ch. 16, p. 140.
(printed under page 158)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 296
- marginal letters: A ire; quid aliud; B legeret, Ἱππο,; C dicibus ejusmodi; D σιν συμπαγῆναι
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek phrases and quotation from Philoponus); editors' matter: ire; quid aliud (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [trans]ire
aliam tertiam, per rarefactionem in sublime una cum firmamento elevatam esse. »
other third was raised up on high through rarefaction together with the firmament."
Caeterum rem acu tetigisse videntur, qui ad istud opus Hippolyteum adversus Graecos et Platonem, existimant respexisse doctorem maximum, dum ait: Scripsit et Miltiades contra gentes volumen egregium. Hippolytus quoque, et Apollonius Romanae urbis senator, propria opuscula condiderunt. Imitatus nempe fuerit sanctus Pater viros ea tempestate longe doctissimos, qui ethnicorum placita scriptis suis evertere aggressi sunt; Clementem, inquam, Alexandrinum, Caium sodalem suum, Ecclesiae Romanae presbyterum, et alios.
Moreover, they seem to have hit the nail on the head who consider that the greatest doctor looked to that Hippolytean work Against the Greeks and Plato when he says: Miltiades also wrote an excellent volume against the Gentiles. Hippolytus also, and Apollonius, a senator of the city of Rome, composed their own little works. Doubtless the holy Father imitated men by far the most learned at that time, who undertook to overthrow the tenets of the heathens by their writings; Clement of Alexandria, I say, Caius his companion, presbyter of the Roman Church, and others.
ARTICULUS VI.
ARTICLE VI.
TRACTATUS S. HIPPOLYTI « CONTRA NOETUM. »
THE TREATISE OF ST HIPPOLYTUS "AGAINST NOETUS."
§ I. Tractatus contra Noetum est genuinus sancti Hippolyti fetus.
§ I. The treatise against Noetus is a genuine offspring of St Hippolytus.
Quintum locum occupat egregia sane lucubratio contra haeresim Noeti. Et scripsisse quidem Hippolytum contra omnes haereses, testantur Eusebius atque Hieronymus; at Photius, qui opus istud legisse comperitur, nos edocet Hippolyti librum adversus haereses duas et triginta exaratum fuisse; ubi S. Pater initium a Dositheanis ducens, in Noeto desinebat; qui nimirum prodire coepit imperante Alexandro sub annum 230, ut proinde, quod superest illius operis, pars ultima fuerit. Ad ejus autem integritatem astruendam, illud in primis observare praestat, locum insignem satisque prolixum ex eo descripsisse sanctum Gelasium, cui opus ejusmodi brevitatis ergo Memoria haeresum dicitur. Sic enim ille, recensens testimonia veterum de duabus in Christo naturis: Hippolyti episcopi et martyris Arabum metropolis in Memoria haeresum: « Hic procedens in mundum, Deus et homo apparuit, » etc. Quae quidem verba, pauculis immutatis, occurrunt apud sanctum Hippolytum cap. 18. Quid quod vel ipsemet Sandius, reliquis Hippolyteis tanquam nothis rejectis, hoc unum contra haeresin Noeti germanum agnoscendum existimat.
The fifth place is occupied by a truly excellent treatise Against the Heresy of Noetus. And that Hippolytus indeed wrote against all heresies, Eusebius and Jerome testify; while Photius, who is found to have read that work, informs us that the book of Hippolytus was written against thirty-two heresies; wherein the holy Father, taking his beginning from the Dositheans, ended with Noetus; who doubtless began to come forth when Alexander was reigning about the year 230, so that accordingly what survives of that work was the last part. Now to establish its authenticity, it is best in the first place to observe this, that St Gelasius transcribed a notable and fairly lengthy passage from it, by whom a work of this kind is called for the sake of brevity Memorial of Heresies. For thus he writes, reviewing the testimonies of the ancients concerning the two natures in Christ: Of Hippolytus, bishop and martyr of the metropolis of the Arabs, in the Memorial of Heresies: "He coming forth into the world, appeared God and man," etc. Which words indeed, with a very few changes, occur in St Hippolytus, chap. 18. What of the fact that even Sandius himself, having rejected the remaining Hippolytean works as spurious, considers that this one work Against the Heresy of Noetus must be acknowledged as genuine?
Praeclarum autem hunc commentarium in lucem extulit Gerardus Vossius Tungrensis inter Miscellanea sanctorum aliquot Patrum Graecorum et Latinorum, ad calcem Operum S. Gregorii Thaumaturgi edit. Moguntinae 1604, 4, ex Latina versione Francisci Turriani, subjectis etiam animadversionibus ejusdem interpretis pag. 58-71. Exinde vero editio repetita in Bibliothecis Patrum Coloniensi 1618, Parisiensi 1644, et Lugdunensi 1677, nec non in Supplementi Morelliani tomo I, pag. 620. Graece demum
Now Gerard Vossius of Tongeren brought this distinguished commentary to light among the Miscellanies of Several Holy Greek and Latin Fathers, at the end of the Works of St Gregory Thaumaturgus in the Mainz edition of 1604, 4to, from the Latin version of Francis Turrianus, with the notes of the same translator also subjoined, pp. 58-71. And thereafter the edition was repeated in the Bibliothecae Patrum of Cologne in 1618, of Paris in 1644, and of Lyons in 1677, as well as in vol. I of the Morellian Supplement, p. 620. Finally, in Greek
Editors' notes and page, col. 297
Footnotes
(28) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 297
Hieronym., epist. 70 ad Magn., orat. § 4.
Jerome, letter 70, to Magnus the orator, § 4.
(printed under page 159)
(29) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 297
Euseb., H. E. lib. VI, cap. 22.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book VI, ch. 22.
(printed under page 159)
(30) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 297
Hieronym., De vir. illustr., cap. 61.
Jerome, On Illustrious Men, ch. 61.
(printed under page 159)
(31) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 297
Phot., Bibl. cod. CXXI.
Photius, Bibliotheca, codex 121.
(printed under page 159)
(32) ‹anchor: in Christo naturis› · call in col 297
Gelas., De duabus naturis, tom. IV, part. I, Biblioth. PP. edit. Paris. 1644, p. 424.
Gelasius, On the Two Natures, vol. IV, part I, Bibliotheca Patrum, Paris edition of 1644, p. 424.
(printed under page 159)
(33) ‹anchor: agnoscendum existimat› · call in col 297
Sand. Nucl. Hist. eccl., in tract. De veter. script. eccl. pag. 27.
Sand, Nucleus historiae ecclesiasticae, in the treatise On the Ancient Ecclesiastical Writers, p. 27.
(printed under page 159)
Page
- running head: 297 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A aliam tertiam,; B § I. Tractatus contra; C modi brevitatis; D edit. Moguntinae
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: aliam tertiam (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); ARTICULUS VI.
primus vulgavit Fabricius ex codicis Vaticani apographo, quod viro praestantissimo Montfauconio acceptum retulit. Alterius codicis Graeci exemplar detexit in antiquissimo S. Basilii monasterio Guilielmus cardinalis Sirletus, ejusque meminit in epistola Liturgiae S. Marci evangelistae praemissa.
Fabricius first published it from a transcript of the Vatican codex, which he acknowledged having received from the most distinguished man Montfaucon. Cardinal William Sirleto discovered a copy of another Greek codex in the most ancient monastery of St Basil, and mentions it in the epistle prefixed to the Liturgy of St Mark the Evangelist.
Caeterum operis inscriptio apud Turrianum sic legitur: Homilia de Deo trino et uno, et de mysterio Incarnationis contra haeresim Noeti. In codice autem Vaticano est hujusmodi: Ὁμιλία Ἱππολύτου εἰς τὴν αἵρεσιν Νοήτου τινος. In eo enimvero S. Pater fideles interdum alloquitur, ut in homiliis fieri solet. Sed in aliis quoque scriptis eadem methodo usos fuisse veteres satis liquet, ut advertit laudatus Fabricius.
Moreover, the title of the work in Turrianus reads thus: Homily on God Triune and One, and on the Mystery of the Incarnation against the Heresy of Noetus. In the Vatican codex, however, it is of this kind: Homily of Hippolytus against the Heresy of a Certain Noetus. In it indeed the holy Father sometimes addresses the faithful, as is wont to be done in homilies. But that in other writings also the ancients used the same method is sufficiently clear, as the aforesaid Fabricius notes.
§ II. Analysis hujus tractatus.
§ II. Analysis of this treatise.
Noetus juxta S. Hippolytum fuit genere Smyrnaeus. Dixit hic haereticus Christum esse eumdem Patrem, ipsumque Patrem genitum esse et passum... aiebat se esse Moysem, et fratrem suum esse Aaron. Hoc cum beati presbyteri audirent, accersitum coram Ecclesia examinaverunt; ille vero negabat principio, sic se sentire; postea vero in quibusdam delitescens, et collectis aliis, qui in eodem errore erant, volebat aperte dogma suum defendere; quem rursus accersitum presbyteri redarguerunt; ille vero resistebat, inquiens, quid igitur mali facio, si Christum honoro? huic presbyteri responderunt: Et nos unum Deum vere scimus Christum, scimus Filium passum, sicut passus est, mortuum, sicut mortuus est; et suscitatum tertia die et sedentem ad dexteram Patris, venturumque ad judicandum vivos et mortuos; atque haec dicimus quae didicimus. Tunc istum convictum ejecerunt ex Ecclesia, qui eo inflationis venit, ut docere institueret.
Noetus according to St Hippolytus was a Smyrnaean by race. This heretic said that Christ is the same Father, and that the Father Himself was begotten and suffered... he used to say that he was Moses, and that his brother was Aaron. When the blessed presbyters heard this, they summoned him and examined him before the Church; at first, however, he denied that he thought thus; but afterwards, lurking among certain persons, and having gathered others who were in the same error, he wished openly to defend his dogma; whom the presbyters summoned again and refuted; but he resisted, saying, What evil then do I do, if I honour Christ? To him the presbyters answered: We also truly know one God, Christ, we know the Son to have suffered, as He suffered, to have died, as He died, and to have been raised on the third day and sitting at the right hand of the Father, and to come to judge the living and the dead; and we say these things which we have learned. Then, having convicted him, they cast him out of the Church, who came to such a pitch of arrogance that he undertook to teach.
Antequam S. Hippolytus distinctionem Personarum in unitate divinae naturae in SS. Trinitate demonstret, prius argumenta Noeti contra Trinitatem, seu distinctionem divinarum Personarum proponit, et dissolvit interpretando verum SS. Scripturarum sensum, quibus Noetiani abutebantur, vel quarum textum malitiose detruncabant. Refutatis Noeti argumentis S. Hippolytus Trinitatem et distinctionem divinarum Personarum demonstrare aggreditur ex ipsis sacris Scripturis, et in primis notat quod unus sit Deus, quem non aliunde agnoscimus, quam ex sacris Scripturis... Quaecunque ergo S. Scripturae praedicant, sciamus; et quaecunque docent, agnoscamus, et sicut vult Pater credi, sic credamus; et
Before St Hippolytus demonstrates the distinction of Persons in the unity of the divine nature in the Most Holy Trinity, he first propounds the arguments of Noetus against the Trinity, or the distinction of the divine Persons, and dissolves them by interpreting the true sense of the Most Holy Scriptures, which the Noetians abused, or whose text they maliciously mutilated. Having refuted the arguments of Noetus, St Hippolytus undertakes to demonstrate the Trinity and the distinction of the divine Persons from the sacred Scriptures themselves, and in the first place notes that there is one God, Whom we know from no other source than from the sacred Scriptures... Whatever things therefore the sacred Scriptures proclaim, let us know; and whatever things they teach, let us acknowledge, and as the Father wills to be believed, so let us believe; and
Editors' notes and page, col. 298
Footnotes
(34) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 298 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Vid. Biblioth. PP. Paris. 1644, tom. XII, pag. 265.
See the Bibliotheca Patrum, Paris 1644, vol. XII, p. 265.
(printed under page 159)
(35) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 298 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Hippolyt. contra Noet. num. 1; Theodoret. lib. III Haeret. fabul., cap. 3, idem affirmat. S. Epiphanius vero Ephesinum statuit: In Asia oriundus, urbe Epheso. Epiph. haeres. 57, num. 1.
Hippolytus, Against Noetus, no. 1; Theodoret, Compendium of Heretical Fables, book III, ch. 3, affirms the same. St Epiphanius, however, makes him an Ephesian: "A native of Asia, of the city of Ephesus." Epiphanius, Heresy 57, no. 1.
(printed under page 159)
(36) ‹anchor: vivos et mortuos› · call in col 298
Hi articuli coincidunt cum Symbolo a D. Irenaeo recitato lib. I, cap. 2, et lib. III, cap. 4; habentur etiam apud Tertullianum lib. contra Praxeam, cap. 2.
These articles coincide with the Creed recited by St Irenaeus, book I, ch. 2, and book III, ch. 4; they are also found in Tertullian, the book Against Praxeas, ch. 2.
(printed under page 159)
(37) ‹anchor: notat› · call in col 298
Hippolyt. contra Noet., num. 9.
Hippolytus, Against Noetus, no. 9.
(printed under page 159)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 298
- marginal letters: A primus vulgavit; B § II. Analysis; C Christum, scimus; D divinarum Personarum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek title quotation); editors' matter: primus vulgavit (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); § II. Analysis hujus tractatus.
sicut vult Filius glorificari, sic glorificemus; et sicut vult donari Spiritum sanctum, sic accipiamus, non secundum propriam voluntatem, neque secundum proprium sensum, neque vim inferentes in ea quae ab eo data sunt, sed quomodo ipse per S. Scripturas docere voluit, sic intelligamus.
as the Son wills to be glorified, so let us glorify Him; and as He wills the Holy Spirit to be given, so let us receive Him, not according to our own will, nor according to our own sense, nor doing violence to the things which have been given by Him, but in the way in which He Himself willed to teach through the sacred Scriptures, so let us understand.
Post haec de generatione aeterna et consubstantialitate Filii disserit, atque incarnatione Verbi. Docet solum Verbum incarnatum idemque esse Filium Dei, idque ex Apocalypsi etiam probat, quam sub nomine Joannis evangelistae laudat. Non Patrem, sed Filium solum incarnatum fuisse declarat monetque curiositatem in mysteriis perscrutandis vitandam esse. Tandem tradit duas naturas duasque operationes in Christo profitendas esse, et cum doxologia concludit suum tractatum. Caeterum observandum, quod notante cl. Tillemontio Epiphanius haeresi 57, quae est Noetianorum, ex Hippolyto, licet non nominato, multa ad verbum repetat pro refutandis illis haereticis, atque judice Ceillierio verisimile etiam est, quod Epiphanius ex hoc Hippolyteo fragmento illum locum historicum de excommunicatione Noeti mutuatus fuerit. Tandem hoc Hyppolyti fragmentum, contra Dupinium illud inficiantem, egregie vindicant auctores Historiae litterariae Francorum.
After these things he discourses on the eternal generation and consubstantiality of the Son, and the incarnation of the Word. He teaches that the Word alone was incarnate and that the same is the Son of God, and he proves this also from the Apocalypse, which he cites under the name of John the Evangelist. He declares that not the Father, but the Son alone was incarnate, and warns that curiosity in scrutinizing mysteries is to be avoided. Finally, he hands down that two natures and two operations in Christ are to be professed, and concludes his treatise with a doxology. Moreover, it is to be observed that, as the illustrious Tillemont notes, Epiphanius in Heresy 57, which is that of the Noetians, repeats many things word for word from Hippolytus, though unnamed, for refuting those heretics, and in the judgement of Ceillier it is also probable that Epiphanius borrowed from this Hippolytean fragment that historical passage concerning the excommunication of Noetus. Finally, the authors of the Literary History of the French excellently vindicate this fragment of Hippolytus against Dupin, who denies it.
ARTICULUS VII.
ARTICLE VII.
DE TRACTATU S. HIPPOLYTI DE THEOLOGIA ET INCARNATIONE ADVERSUS BERONEM ET HELICEM.
ON THE TREATISE OF ST HIPPOLYTUS ON THEOLOGY AND THE INCARNATION AGAINST BERO AND HELIX.
§ I. Excerpta VIII ex sermone de theologia et incarnatione quis nobis servarit.
§ I. Who has preserved for us the eight excerpts from the discourse on theology and the incarnation.
Anastasius presbyter ac Romanae Ecclesiae apocrisiarius circa medium saeculi septimi testatur, quod cum Constantinopoli commoratus esset, ad ipsum delatus fuerit liber S. Hippolyti episcopi Portus Romani ac martyris, in quo anticipato refellit haeresim Monothelitarum; quem cum totum describere vellet, vix valuit ex ipso plus quam octo loca seu testimonia extrahere, invidia Monothelitarum, qui eumdem librum e manibus ipsi diripuerunt. Octo haec fragmenta ex sermone De theologia et incarnatione contra Beronem et Helicem nobis servarunt,
Anastasius, presbyter and apocrisiarius of the Roman Church about the middle of the seventh century, testifies that when he was staying at Constantinople, there was brought to him a book of St Hippolytus, bishop of Portus Romanus and martyr, in which by anticipation he refutes the heresy of the Monothelites; which when he wished to transcribe in full, he was scarcely able to extract from it more than eight passages or testimonies, through the envy of the Monothelites, who snatched the same book out of his hands. These eight fragments from the discourse On Theology and the Incarnation against Bero and Helix have been preserved
Editors' notes and page, col. 299
Footnotes
(38) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 299
Hippolyt. contra Noet. num. 10, 11.
Hippolytus, Against Noetus, nos. 10, 11.
(printed under page 160)
(39) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 299
Id. ibid., num. 12.
The same, in the same place, no. 12.
(printed under page 160)
(40) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 299
Id. ibid., num. 14.
The same, in the same place, no. 14.
(printed under page 160)
(41) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 299
Id. ibid., num. 15.
The same, in the same place, no. 15.
(printed under page 160)
(42) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 299
Id. ibid., num. 16, 17.
The same, in the same place, nos. 16, 17.
(printed under page 160)
(43) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 299
Id. ibid., num. 17 et 18.
The same, in the same place, nos. 17 and 18.
(printed under page 160)
(44) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 299
Tillemont., Mémoir., tom. III, pag. 107.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, p. 107.
(printed under page 160)
(45) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 299
Ceillier, Hist. génér., tom. II, pag. 342.
Ceillier, Histoire générale, vol. II, p. 342.
(printed under page 160)
(46) ‹anchor: contra Dupinium› · call in col 299
Dupin, Biblioth. auct., tom. I, pag. 177.
Dupin, Bibliothèque des auteurs, vol. I, p. 177.
(printed under page 160)
(47) ‹anchor: Historiae litterariae Francorum› · call in col 299
Hist. littér. de la France, tom. I, part. I, pag. 394.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, part I, p. 394.
(printed under page 160)
(48) ‹anchor: testatur› · call in col 299
«Praeterea misi ad praesens cum hac epistola mea... notulam habentem testimonia ex dictis S. Hippolyti episcopi Portus Romani ac martyris Christi Dei nostri, quo et per ea nosse habeatis, quam concorditer cum aliis omnibus sanctis Patribus Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi praedicet naturas et operationes, refellat autem eos, qui unam operationem et naturam unam divinitatis et humanitatis ejus dogmatizant... Hunc librum Byzantii nobis, antequam passi fuissemus, delatum, cum hunc totum vellemus transcribere, subito juxta consuetudinem suam insistentes adversarii latronum more rapuerunt, et non valuimus ex ipso plus quam octo haec testimonia tollere.» Anastas., epist. ad Theodos. presbyt. Gangreus., tom. III Opp. Sirmondi., pag. 579.
"Besides, I have sent at present with this letter of mine... a little note containing testimonies from the sayings of St Hippolytus, bishop of Portus Romanus and martyr of Christ our God, so that through them too you may know how, in concord with all the other holy Fathers, he proclaims the natures and operations of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and refutes those who teach one operation and one nature of his divinity and humanity... This book was brought to us at Byzantium before we suffered; when we wished to copy it whole, the adversaries, pressing upon us after their custom, suddenly snatched it away like robbers, and we could take from it no more than these eight testimonies." Anastasius, letter to Theodosius, priest of Gangra, vol. III of Sirmond's Works, p. 579.
(printed under page 160)
Page
- running head: 299 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A sicut vult Filius; B esse (43), et cum; C § I. Excerpta VIII; D (38) Hippolyt.
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: sicut vult Filius (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); ARTICULUS VII.; word split at end of column: ser-[varunt]
Graece quidem Nicephorus CP. in Antirrheticis contra Iconomachos; Anastasius vero apocrisiarius in suis Collectaneis Latine reddita. Ex Turriani versione primus illa vulgavit Henricus Canisius. Graeca deinceps ex ejusdem Turriani codice addidit Anastasianae versioni Sirmondus. Graece item et Latine Operum S. Maximi tomo I praemissa edidit Combefisius, qui et Anastasii versionem recensuit. Eadem exinde in suum Hippolytum transtulit Fabricius. Posthaec ex Combefisii editione, Graeca desumpsit Basnagius, ac Turriani versioni adjunxit tom. I Thesauri Canisiani; ad cujus calcem praeterea V. C. Claudii Capperonnierii animadversiones in Anastasii versionem cum Graecis collatam adjecit. His subsidiis instructus cl. Gallandius editionem suam paravit: praecedentium editorum observationes subjecit, neque notas omisit, quas eruditus Sirmondianorum editor margini allevit; Anastasii versioni testimoniorum Hippolyteorum, Combefisianam recensionem apposuit, atque integras Capperonnierii animadversiones subdidit.
for us, in Greek indeed by Nicephorus of Constantinople in his Antirrhetics against the Iconoclasts, and rendered into Latin by Anastasius the apocrisiarius in his Collectanea. Henry Canisius first published them from the version of Turrianus. Thereafter Sirmond added the Greek from the codex of the same Turrianus to the Anastasian version. Combefis likewise published them in Greek and Latin prefixed to vol. I of the Works of St Maximus, and also revised the version of Anastasius. Thereafter Fabricius transferred the same into his Hippolytus. After this, from the edition of Combefis, Basnage took the Greek and joined it to the version of Turrianus in vol. I of the Thesaurus of Canisius; at the end of which, moreover, he added the notes of the illustrious Claude Capperonnier on the version of Anastasius collated with the Greek. Equipped with these aids, the illustrious Gallandi prepared his edition: he subjoined the observations of the preceding editors, nor did he omit the notes which the learned editor of Sirmond's works wrote in the margin; to the version of Anastasius of the Hippolytean testimonies he placed opposite the recension of Combefis, and subjoined the complete notes of Capperonnier.
De operis integritate non est profecto cur jure dubitare quis valeat. Nihil quippe in his fragmentis legere est, quod Hippolytum apprime non deceat; quinimo sive argumentum spectes, sive disputandi rationem; omnia pene gemina cum praecedenti opusculo contra Noetum reperias; ut proinde fragmenta ejusmodi merito vindicent Hippolyto viri doctissimi, Bullus in primis, Tillemontius aliique.
Concerning the authenticity of the work there is assuredly no reason why anyone can rightly doubt. For there is nothing to read in these fragments which does not eminently befit Hippolytus; nay rather, whether you look at the subject-matter or the manner of disputing, you will find all things almost twin with the preceding little work against Noetus; so that accordingly most learned men, Bull in the first place, Tillemont, and others, deservedly vindicate fragments of this kind for Hippolytus.
Sed vir doctissimus Ellies Dupinus dubitat, an illa excerpta S. Hippolytum habeant auctorem; Natalis autem Alexander, Petavius, Sandius et Basnagius probare conantur librum De theologia et incarnatione non esse S. Hippolyti opus genuinum. Audiamus ipsum Natalem Alexandrum contra haec excerpta ista disserentem: « Liber De theologia et incarnatione contra Beronem et Helicem haereticos... non videtur esse sancti Hippolyti, cujus nomen praefert. Nec enim ejus meminere veteres, nec congruit temporibus Hippolyti. Refellit enim errorem Apollinaris et Eutychetis de mutatione divinitatis
But the most learned man Ellies Dupin doubts whether those excerpts have St Hippolytus as their author; while Natalis Alexander, Petavius, Sandius, and Basnage endeavour to prove that the book On Theology and the Incarnation is not a genuine work of St Hippolytus. Let us hear Natalis Alexander himself discoursing thus against these excerpts: "The book On Theology and the Incarnation against the heretics Bero and Helix... does not seem to be of St Hippolytus, whose name it bears. For neither have the ancients mentioned it, nor does it agree with the times of Hippolytus. For it refutes the error of Apollinaris and Eutyches concerning the change of the divinity
Editors' notes and page, col. 300
Footnotes
(49) ‹anchor: Bullus› · call in col 300
Bullus, Defens. fid. Nicaen., sect. II, cap. 8, § 5, pag. 98.
Bull, Defence of the Nicene Faith, section II, ch. 8, § 5, p. 98.
(printed under page 160)
(50) ‹anchor: Tillemontius› · call in col 300
Tillemont, Mémoir. eccl., tom. III, pag. 108 et 109.
Tillemont, Mémoires ecclésiastiques, vol. III, pp. 108 and 109.
(printed under page 160)
(51) ‹anchor: habeant auctorem› · call in col 300
Dupin, Bibl. auct., pag. 178.
Dupin, Bibliothèque des auteurs, p. 178.
(printed under page 160)
(52) ‹anchor: Sandius› · call in col 300
Sand., Vet. script. eccles., pag. 27.
Sand, On the Ancient Ecclesiastical Writers, p. 27.
(printed under page 160)
(53) ‹anchor: Basnagius› · call in col 300
Basnage, Animadvers. ad Thesaur. Canisian., tom. I, pag. 10, 11.
Basnage, Observations on Canisius's Thesaurus, vol. I, pp. 10, 11.
(printed under page 160)
(54) ‹anchor: Natalem Alexandrum› · call in col 300
Natal. Alexandr., Hist. eccles., saec. III, cap. 4, articul. 1, pag. 65.
Noël Alexandre, Ecclesiastical History, third century, ch. 4, article 1, p. 65.
(printed under page 160)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 300
- marginal letters: A varunt, Graece; B landius editionem; C aliique.; D ejus dogmatizant...
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: varunt, Graece (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [ser]varunt; word split at end of column: divini-[tatis]
in carnem, vel carnis in Deum (ut constat ex illis verbis cap. 4): Quam essentiam, inquit, habebit eorum opinione factus homo mutata divinitate in carnem? Et quam habebit Deus mutata carne in Deum? Mutatio enim duarum naturarum inter se, interitus est ambarum. Nec solum post haereses Apollinaris et Eutychetis jam ortas, verum etiam post Monothelitarum haeresim effusam, conscriptus videtur iste liber. Nam in eo maxima pars ejus versatur, ut duas in Christo operationes probet; alioquin naturarum confusionem secuturam; sic nempe habet cap. 5: Carnem a Verbo assumptam, unam et eamdem operationem habere, quam divinitas, propter assumptionem; divinitatem vero eamdem passionem, quam caro propter exinanitionem; sic mutationem simul et mistionem ac confusionem, et ambarum naturarum in seipsas conversionem tradunt. Si enim caro assumpta eamdem operationem habet, quam divinitas; liquet factam esse natura Deum habereque omnia, cum quibus naturaliter intelligitur Deus; et si divinitas exinanita eamdem passionem subit, quam caro; liquet factam esse natura carnem, habereque illa omnia, cum quibus naturaliter nosci potest caro. Quae enim inter se sunt ejusdem operationis, et efficientiae, ac cognitionis, et omnino idem patiuntur, nullam naturae differentiam admittunt. Et cap. 6: Qui eamdem operationem diversis naturis Christi tribuit, confusionem naturarum simul introducit, et divisionem personarum; cum naturalis essentia naturarum per mutationem proprietatum penitus sublata sit. Et cap. 7: Creator omnium ex sancta Virgine Maria in conceptu puro, sine mutatione, animam intelligentem cum corpore sentiente sibi substantialiter uniens, factus est homo, natura a peccato alienus, Deus Verbum, idem Deus totus, idem item homo totus, divinitate quidem divina operans per sanctam carnem, quae natura non erant carnis; humanitate vero humana, quae natura non erant divinitatis; patiens sustentatione divinitatis, nihil divinum nudum corpore operans, nihilque humanum expers divinitatis; servans sibi novum modum, quo utraque, divina scilicet et humana operatus est, ut in neutra natura mutatio fieret. Certe cum haec Monothelitarum errorem, unicam in Christo voluntatem propugnantium, directe petant; verisimillimum est, librum illum ante septimum saeculum, quo exorti sunt Monothelitae, elucubratum non fuisse.
into flesh, or of the flesh into God (as is established from those words of chap. 4): What essence, he says, will he have who in their opinion is made man when the divinity is changed into flesh? And what essence will God have when the flesh is changed into God? For the change of two natures into one another is the destruction of both. And not only after the heresies of Apollinaris and Eutyches had already arisen, but even after the heresy of the Monothelites had spread abroad, does that book seem to have been written. For the greatest part of it is occupied therein with proving two operations in Christ, otherwise a confusion of natures would follow; for thus it has in chap. 5: That the flesh assumed by the Word has one and the same operation as the divinity, on account of the assumption; and that the divinity has the same passion as the flesh on account of the emptying; thus they hand down a change at once and a mixture and confusion, and a conversion of both natures into themselves. For if the assumed flesh has the same operation as the divinity, it is clear that it has been made God by nature and has all things with which God is naturally understood; and if the emptied divinity undergoes the same passion as the flesh, it is clear that it has been made flesh by nature, and has all those things with which flesh can naturally be known. For things which among themselves are of the same operation, and efficacy, and knowledge, and altogether suffer the same thing, admit no difference of nature. And chap. 6: He who attributes the same operation to the diverse natures of Christ introduces at once a confusion of natures and a division of persons, since the natural essence of the natures is wholly taken away through the change of properties. And chap. 7: The Creator of all things, from the holy Virgin Mary in a pure conception, without change, uniting substantially to Himself an intelligent soul with a sentient body, was made man, by nature foreign to sin, God the Word, the same wholly God, the same likewise wholly man, by His divinity indeed working divine things through His holy flesh, which by nature did not belong to the flesh; and by His humanity human things, which by nature did not belong to the divinity; suffering by the sustainment of the divinity, working nothing divine bare of the body, and nothing human devoid of the divinity; preserving for Himself a new mode, whereby He worked both, namely divine and human things, so that in neither nature was a change made. Certainly, since these things directly attack the error of the Monothelites, who maintain a single will in Christ, it is most probable that that book was not composed before the seventh century, in which the Monothelites arose.
« Deinde si exstitisset tempore Chalcedonensis concilii, Theodoretus illa procul dubio testimonia
"Secondly, if it had existed at the time of the Council of Chalcedon, Theodoret without doubt would have brought forward those testimonies
Editors' notes and page, col. 301
Page
- running head: 301 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A tatis in carnem,; B seipsas conversionem; C lata sit. Et cap. 7:; D est, librum illum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: tatis in carnem (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [divini]tatis
adversus Eutychianos protulisset in tribus dialogis, quos contra ipsos composuit: maxime cum alia ex Operibus Hippolyti loca recenseat, nimirum ex oratione de distributione talentorum, ex epistola ad quamdam reginam, ex sermone in Helcanam et Annam, quae minus splendida sunt et diserta, quam ea, quae proxime adduximus. Non omisisset certe diligentissimus scriptor testimonia deprompta ex libro De theologia et incarnatione, et in suum scopum tam directe collineantia, suo tam convenientia argumento, si in rerum natura liber hujusmodi exstitisset.
against the Eutychians in the three dialogues which he composed against them: especially since he reviews other passages from the Works of Hippolytus, namely from the discourse on the distribution of the talents, from the epistle to a certain queen, and from the discourse on Elkanah and Hannah, which are less splendid and eloquent than those which we have just adduced. Certainly the most diligent writer would not have omitted testimonies drawn from the book On Theology and the Incarnation, aiming so directly at his mark and so suited to his argument, if a book of this kind had existed in the nature of things.
« Denique Beronis et Helices haereticorum, contra quos editus fertur, nulla est in tota retro antiquitate memoria. » Hactenus V. C. Nec valet responsum Canisii et Possevini, errorem de mutatione divinitatis in humanitatem, vel humanitatis in divinitatem, esse antiquiorem Eutychete ac Apollinari, cum ejus meminerit sanctus Justinus in Expositione fidei, adeoque non esse abjudicandum sancto Hippolyto librum de quo agimus, quod eorum errorem refellat. Nam statim respondet Natalis Expositionem fidei non esse genuinum sancti Justini M. opus, adeoque responsionem Canisii et Possevini in auras evanescere.
"Finally, of the heretics Bero and Helix, against whom it is said to have been published, there is no memory in all past antiquity." Thus far the illustrious man. Nor does the reply of Canisius and Possevinus avail, that the error concerning the change of the divinity into humanity, or of humanity into divinity, is older than Eutyches and Apollinaris, since St Justin mentions it in the Exposition of the Faith, and that therefore the book of which we are treating is not to be denied to St Hippolytus because it refutes their error. For Natalis immediately answers that the Exposition of the Faith is not a genuine work of St Justin Martyr, and that therefore the reply of Canisius and Possevinus vanishes into thin air.
§ II. Respondetur argumentis Natal. Alexandri, et vindicatur Hippolyto hoc opusculum.
§ II. The arguments of Natalis Alexander are answered, and this little work is vindicated for Hippolytus.
Verum haec Natalis argumenta pro abjudicando S. Hippolyto tractatu, in cujus possessione plus quam mille annos fuit, non sunt satis gravia. Primo enim mirum nobis videtur, cur non possit auctor catholicus primorum trium saeculorum idem profiteri ac defendere quod semper creditum fuit in et ab Ecclesia tam ante, quam post exortas haereses. Fatemur quidem eos Patres, qui post enatos errores, quos etiam oppugnaverunt, vixerunt, plerumque accuratius circa veritates in controversiam adductas sese expressisse, quam illos, qui ante enatas contentiones scripsere. At vero inde haud statim colligendum est, loquendi formulas, quae post alicujus haereseos originem adhibebantur, non potuisse usurpari saltem ab aliquibus ante illius haereseos initia. Certe S. Athanasius, qui diu ante haeresim Monothelitarum, Nestorianorum et Eutychianorum scripserat, nihilominus mysterium Incarnationis ea ratione exponit, qua omnes horum haereticorum errores aequaliter impugnantur et jugulantur. Profitetur enim duas voluntates et duas naturas in Jesu Christo sine confusione, aut permistione,
Yet these arguments of Natalis for denying to St Hippolytus a treatise in the possession of which he has been for more than a thousand years, are not sufficiently weighty. For in the first place it seems wonderful to us why a Catholic author of the first three centuries cannot profess and defend the same thing that was always believed in and by the Church both before and after heresies arose. We confess indeed that those Fathers who lived after errors had sprung up, which they also attacked, for the most part expressed themselves more accurately concerning the truths brought into controversy than those who wrote before the contentions sprang up. Yet from that it is by no means immediately to be gathered that formulas of speaking which were employed after the origin of some heresy could not have been used at least by some before the beginnings of that heresy. Certainly St Athanasius, who had written long before the heresy of the Monothelites, Nestorians, and Eutychians, nevertheless expounds the mystery of the Incarnation in such a way that all the errors of these heretics are equally attacked and cut down. For he professes two wills and two natures in Jesus Christ without confusion or mixture,
Editors' notes and page, col. 302
Footnotes
(55) ‹anchor: duas voluntates› · call in col 302
«Cumque ait Christus: Pater, si possibile est, transeat a me calix iste: verumtamen non mea voluntas, sed tua fiat; et: Spiritus quidem promptus est, caro autem infirma: duas voluntates ibi ostendit; alteram humanam, quae est carnis; alteram divinam, quae Dei est.» Athanas., De Incarnat. contra Arianos, pag. 887. «Itaque verus est Dei Filius, priusquam homo fieret; et postquam factus est, mediator Dei et hominum homo Christus Jesus. Hoc enim, est quod dicit, et quem misit Jesum Christum, unitum Patri secundum Spiritum nobis vero secundum carnem; et sic mediatorem Dei et hominum, qui non solum homo, sed etiam Deus est.» Ibid., pag. 888. «Sicque dicendus fuerit Christus perfectus Deus et perfectus homo; non quod divina perfectio in humanam perfectionem mutata sit, quod a pietate alienum est; neque per incrementum virtutis, et accessione justitiae, absit, sed ratione exsistentiae indeficientis, ut utraque unus sint, omnino perfectus idem Deus et homo.» Athanas., lib. I contr. Apollin., p. 936.
"And when Christ says: Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not my will, but yours be done; and: The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak: he there shows two wills; the one human, which is of the flesh; the other divine, which is of God." Athanasius, On the Incarnation, against the Arians, p. 887. "So he is true Son of God before he became man; and after he became man, the mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus. For this is what he says, 'and Jesus Christ whom you have sent': united to the Father according to the Spirit, but to us according to the flesh; and so the mediator of God and men, who is not only man but also God." Ibid., p. 888. "And thus Christ must be called perfect God and perfect man; not that the divine perfection was changed into human perfection, which is foreign to piety; nor by increase of power and accession of righteousness, far be it, but by reason of an unfailing existence, so that both are one, the same wholly perfect, God and man." Athanasius, Against Apollinaris, book I, p. 936.
(printed under page 161)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 302
- marginal letters: A adversus Eutychianos; B sum Canisii; C quam mille annos; D scripserat, nihilominus
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: adversus Eutychianos (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); § II. Respondetur argumentis Natal. Alexandri
vel mutatione; et beatam Virginem Mariam frequenter titulo Matris Dei honorat. Tertullianus Athanasio ac Basilio longe antiquior, distinctionem duarum naturarum, ac unitatem unius in Christo Jesu personae tam clare astruit, ac si jam tum in certamen cum haeresi Nestorii et Eutychetis descendisset. « Deus, inquit, neque desinit esse, neque aliud potest esse. Sermo autem Deus; et sermo Domini manet in aeternum, perseverando scilicet in sua forma. Quem si non capit transfigurari, consequens est, ut sic caro factus intelligatur, dum fit in carne, et manifestatur, et videtur, et contrectatur per carnem; quia et caetera sic accipi exigunt. Si enim sermo transfiguratione et demutatione substantiae, caro factus est, una jam erit substantia Jesus ex duabus, ex carne, ex spiritu mistura quaedam,..... et tertium quid efficitur. Neque ergo Deus erit Jesus, sermo enim desiit esse, qui caro factus est, neque caro, id est homo; caro enim non proprie est, qui sermo fuit, ita ex utroque neutrum est; aliud longe tertium est, quam utrumque. Sed enim invenimus illum directo, et Deum, et hominem expositum, ipso hoc psalmo suggerente: Quoniam Deus homo natus est in illa... Videmus duplicem statum non confusum, sed conjunctum in una persona, Deum et hominem Jesum. Et adeo salva est utriusque proprietas substantiae, ut et Spiritus res suas ageret in illo, id est, virtutes, et opera, et signa, et caro passiones suas functa sit, esuriens sub diabolo, » etc. Origenes contra Celsum suis in libris, S. Gregorius Nazianzenus in litteris suis ad Cledonium, non minus clare rejiciunt errores postea per Nestorium et Eutychetem disseminatos. Et cui unquam criticorum venit in mentem de horum magnorum virorum scriptis propterea contentionem movere, quia pari ratione se expresserant et errores multo post illos subortos tam diserte ac perspicue condemnaverant? Falsi sane fuerunt Canisius et Possevinus in eo, quod Expositionem fidei S. Justino martyri tribuerint; errorem tamen de permistione naturarum in Christo Apollinari et Eutychete antiquiorem esse, quin et ab Ecclesiae doctoribus, qui Hippolytum antecessere, impugnatum fuisse, ex Athanasii et Tertulliani supra allatis locis evidentissime patet. Et sane Tertullianus in laudato libro circa duas in Christo naturas mentem suam eodem modo Latine exprimit, quo S. Hippolytus suis in fragmentis Graece; nihilque expressius aut efficacius dictum unquam fuit
or change; and frequently honours the blessed Virgin Mary with the title of Mother of God. Tertullian, far more ancient than Athanasius and Basil, establishes the distinction of the two natures and the unity of the one person in Christ Jesus as clearly as if he had even then descended into combat with the heresy of Nestorius and Eutyches. "God," he says, "neither ceases to be, nor can He be anything else. Now the Word is God; and the Word of the Lord abides for ever, by persevering namely in His own form. Whom if it does not admit of being transfigured, it follows that He is so understood to have been made flesh, when He comes to be in the flesh, and is manifested, and is seen, and is handled through the flesh; because the other things also require to be so taken. For if the Word was made flesh by a transfiguration and change of substance, Jesus will now be one substance out of two, out of flesh and spirit a certain mixture,..... and a third something is produced. Neither therefore will Jesus be God, for the Word ceased to be, Who was made flesh, nor flesh, that is man; for He is not properly flesh, Who was the Word, and so out of both He is neither; He is a third something far different from both. But indeed we find Him set forth directly both as God and as man, this very psalm suggesting it: Because God, man, was born in her (Ps. 86:5)... We see a twofold state, not confused, but conjoined in one person, Jesus God and man. And the property of each substance is so preserved that both the Spirit carried on Its own affairs in Him, that is, powers, and works, and signs, and the flesh discharged its own passions, hungering under the devil," etc. Origen in his books Against Celsus, and St Gregory Nazianzen in his letters to Cledonius, no less clearly reject the errors afterwards disseminated by Nestorius and Eutyches. And into the mind of which of the critics did it ever come to raise a contention on that account concerning the writings of these great men, because in like manner they had expressed themselves and had so eloquently and perspicuously condemned errors that sprang up long after them? Canisius and Possevinus were assuredly mistaken in this, that they attributed the Exposition of the Faith to St Justin Martyr; yet that the error concerning the mixture of the natures in Christ is older than Apollinaris and Eutyches, nay and was attacked by doctors of the Church who preceded Hippolytus, is most evidently clear from the passages of Athanasius and Tertullian adduced above. And assuredly Tertullian in the aforesaid book expresses his mind in Latin concerning the two natures in Christ in the same way as St Hippolytus in his fragments in Greek; and nothing more express or more efficacious was ever said
Editors' notes and page, col. 303
Footnotes
(56) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 303 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
«Hinc ipse apparens angelus, se a Domino missum esse fatetur, ut Gabriel Zachariae, et Deiparae (Θεοτόκῳ) Mariae, confessus est.» Athanas., tom. I Opp., pag. 563, 579, 583, 642, 875, etc.
"Hence the angel himself, appearing, confesses that he has been sent by the Lord, as Gabriel confessed to Zechariah and to Mary the Mother of God (Θεοτόκῳ)." Athanasius, vol. I of the Works, pp. 563, 579, 583, 642, 875, etc.
(printed under page 162)
(57) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 303 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Tertullian., lib. contr. Prax., cap. 27.
Tertullian, the book Against Praxeas, ch. 27.
(printed under page 162)
Page
- running head: 303 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A vel mutatione;; B carne, ex spiritu; C suis in libris,; D tullianus in laudato
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: vel mutatione (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
contra Eutychetis haeresim, praeter illas Tertulliani sententias. Quis tamen pro egregio sophista illum non haberet, qui hinc concluderet, librum adversus Praxeam Tertulliani non esse, sed auctoris qui demum post Eutychetem scripsit? Sed nimirum, ut in mundo, ita in Ecclesia eadem semper recurrit fabula, et quas posterior aetas novas haereses appellat, eae sunt revera pristini tantum errores renovati, atque ab Orco revocati.
against the heresy of Eutyches, beyond those sentences of Tertullian. Yet who would not hold that man for an egregious sophist who should conclude from this that the book Against Praxeas is not Tertullian's, but of an author who wrote only after Eutyches? But doubtless, as in the world, so in the Church the same play always recurs, and what a later age calls new heresies are in reality only old errors renewed and recalled from Orcus.
Neque mirum nobis videri debet, si in tanta operum multitudine a S. Hippolyto exaratorum, unum aut alterum diligentiam indefessi Theodoreti fugerit. Sane hic auctor nullam de libro Antichristi mentionem facit, licet is tractatus loca magis decretoria complectatur quam alii libri S. Hippolyti, ex quibus testimonia in medium adducit. Num propterea quis affirmabit quod ille tractatus non sit hujus S. martyris? Accedit, quod ipsemet Basnagius, ut bene observant Benedictini e congregatione S. Mauri, fateatur Theodoretum alia proferre testimonia ex S. Hippolyti operibus, quae aliquam verisimilitudinem habeant cum iis, de quibus hic agitur. Quae confessio Basnagii sufficit, ne ei haec octo excerpta abjudicemus.
Nor ought it to seem wonderful to us if in so great a multitude of works written by St Hippolytus, one or another escaped the diligence of the indefatigable Theodoret. Assuredly this author makes no mention of the book On Antichrist, although that treatise comprises more decisive passages than the other books of St Hippolytus from which he brings forward testimonies. Will anyone on that account affirm that that treatise is not of this holy martyr? Added to this is the fact that Basnage himself, as the Benedictines of the Congregation of St Maur well observe, confesses that Theodoret brings forward other testimonies from the works of St Hippolytus which have some likeness to those of which we are treating here. Which confession of Basnage suffices for us not to deny these eight excerpts to him.
Dein si Beron et Helix non fuerant noti saeculo tertio, multo minus id erunt saeculis insequentibus. Et quot fuere haeretici particulares, quinimo et sectae integrae, de quibus ex unico saepe duntaxat libro notitiam accepimus? Sed audio aliquem dicentem Beronem et Helicem esse nomina ficta. At vero tempore Anastasii presbyteri, id est, circa medium saeculi septimi (si anno 666 mortuus fuit hic scriptor), nemo dubitavit quin illi haeretici saeculo tertio exstiterint. Atque auctor, qui eos refutavit, diserte dicit quod Beron non ita pridem sectam Valentinianorum deseruerit; et profecto valde dubito cum cl. Tillemontio, num ostendi possit quod haeresis Valentinianorum ad saeculum usque septimum perdurarit, quo tractatum contra Beronem et Helicem compositum fuisse putat Natalis Alexander. Erat enim secta Valentinianorum, teste Gregorio Nazianzeno, ante finem saeculi velut jam exstincta. Notante tamen diligentissimo Tillemontio, reperiebantur adhuc exiguae quaedam illius reliquiae temporibus S. Nili et Theodoreti.
Next, if Bero and Helix had not been known in the third century, much less will they be so in the following centuries. And how many particular heretics have there been, nay even whole sects, of which we have received notice often from a single book alone? But I hear someone saying that Bero and Helix are fictitious names. Yet in the time of Anastasius the presbyter, that is, about the middle of the seventh century (if this writer died in the year 666), no one doubted that those heretics existed in the third century. And the author who refuted them expressly says that Bero had not so long before deserted the sect of the Valentinians; and assuredly I greatly doubt with the illustrious Tillemont whether it can be shown that the heresy of the Valentinians endured right down to the seventh century, in which Natalis Alexander thinks the treatise against Bero and Helix was composed. For the sect of the Valentinians, as Gregory Nazianzen testifies, was before the end of the century as it were already extinct. Yet as the most diligent Tillemont notes, certain scant remnants of it were still found in the times of St Nilus and Theodoret.
Nihil ergo nos impedit quominus haec octo fragmenta S. Hippolyto adjudicemus. Debemus illa industriae
Nothing therefore hinders us from adjudging these eight fragments to St Hippolytus. We owe them to the industry
Editors' notes and page, col. 304
Footnotes
(58) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 304 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Hist. littér. de la France. Mémoir., t. I, part. I, pag. 382.
Histoire littéraire de la France, Mémoires, vol. I, part I, p. 382.
(printed under page 162)
(59) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 304 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Basnag., l. c., pag. 12.
Basnage, at the place cited, p. 12.
(printed under page 162)
(60) ‹anchor: Beron et Helix› · call in col 304
Tillemontius, Mémoir., tom. III, pag. 109.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, p. 109.
(printed under page 162)
(61) ‹anchor: diserte dicit› · call in col 304
«Bero enim quidam nuper, et alii quidam, Valentini phantasia deserta, deteriori irretiti sunt pravitate.» Tom. I Opp. Hippol., pag. 228, et Collectan. Anastasii pag. 225, cap. 5.
"For a certain Bero lately, and certain others, having abandoned the fantasy of Valentinus, have been entangled in a worse depravity." Vol. I of the Works of Hippolytus, p. 228, and the Collectanea of Anastasius, p. 225, ch. 5.
(printed under page 162)
(62) ‹anchor: cl. Tillemontio› · call in col 304
Tillemont., l. c., pag. 109.
Tillemont, at the place cited, p. 109.
(printed under page 162)
(63) ‹anchor: Gregorio Nazianzeno› · call in col 304
«Fuit quondam illud tempus, cum ab haeresum procellis tranquilla omnia habebamus, videlicet cum Simones,... Valentiniani... atque omnes illorum nugae... suomet tandem, ut aequum erat, profundo absorptae ac silentio traditae fuerunt.» Gregor. Nazianz., orat. 23, pag. 414.
"There was once that time when we had all things calm from the storms of heresies, namely when the Simons,... the Valentinians... and all their trifles... were at length, as was fitting, swallowed up in their own depth and consigned to silence." Gregory Nazianzen, oration 23, p. 414.
(printed under page 162)
(64) ‹anchor: Tillemontio› · call in col 304
Tillemont., l. c.
Tillemont, at the place cited.
(printed under page 162)
(65) ‹anchor: S. Nili› · call in col 304
Nil., lib. I, ep. 254, pag. 87.
Nilus, book I, letter 254, p. 87.
(printed under page 162)
(66) ‹anchor: et Theodoreti› · call in col 304
Theodoret., Haeretic. fabular. lib. I, pag. 218.
Theodoret, Compendium of Heretical Fables, book I, p. 218.
(printed under page 162)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 304
- marginal letters: A contra Eutychetis; B ex quibus testimonia; C quem dicentem; D dam illius reliquiae
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: contra Eutychetis (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: in-[dustriae]
Anastasii, apocrisiarii Romani pontificis, qui ea naufragio, quo reliquum operis interiit, eripuit. Illustris hic fidei de duabus voluntatibus contra Monothelitas confessor et athleta, cum jam in eo esset, ut totum hunc S. Hippolyti tractatum describere inciperet, invidia inimicorum veritatis impeditus, non nisi haec octo loca excerpere potuit. Profecto si haec excerpta velut partem operis Hippolytei non susciperemus, injurii essemus in hunc doctissimum virum; praesertim cum nulla adsit positiva ratio, qua elevaretur auctoritas tam veneratione digni scriptoris, qualis est Anastasius, qui integrum opus in manibus habuit.
of Anastasius, apocrisiarius of the Roman pontiff, who rescued them from the shipwreck in which the rest of the work perished. When this illustrious confessor and champion of the faith concerning the two wills against the Monothelites was already on the point of beginning to transcribe the whole of this treatise of St Hippolytus, hindered by the envy of the enemies of the truth, he was able to excerpt only these eight passages. Assuredly, if we did not receive these excerpts as part of the Hippolytean work, we should be unjust towards this most learned man; especially since there is no positive reason present whereby the authority of a writer so worthy of veneration as Anastasius, who had the entire work in his hands, should be lessened.
§ III. Analysis horum excerptorum.
§ III. Analysis of these excerpts.
Initium hujus tractatus juxta Anastasium Bibliothecarium ita habet: Ἅγιος, ἅγιος, ἅγιος Dominus Sabaoth, incessanti voce clamantes seraphim Deum glorificant.
The beginning of this treatise according to Anastasius Bibliothecarius runs thus: Holy, holy, holy Lord Sabaoth, the seraphim crying out with unceasing voice glorify God (Isa. 6:3).
Beron et illius sequaces admittebant confusionem duarum naturarum in Christo, et non nisi unam agnoscebant in eo operationem. Credebant divinitatem esse passibilem, et humanitatem earumdem operationum, quae soli Verbo competerent, capacem fore. Haec opinio eo illos adduxit, ut defenderent Verbum hominem factum esse mutatione suae divinitatis in naturam humanam, et hominem factum fuisse Deum mutatione humanae naturae in divinitatem. Ut impietatem hanc refutaret S. Hippolytus, 1° docet Verbum divinum assumendo carnem et naturam humanam nullam in divinitate sua mutationem passum fuisse; 2° duas naturas astruit in Christo, divinam et humanam inconfusas, et duas operationes ac voluntates; 3° exponit quomodo Deus per carnem operetur; 4° ex duabus in Christo naturis proprietates, et operationes distinctas ulterius probat S. Hippolytus; 5° demonstrat contra Beronem et ejus sequaces unam in Christo esse personam; deinde ostendit carnem in naturam divinam mutari haud posse; operationemque humanam a divina distinctam esse. Tandem ex his concludit sanctus Pater ita: Pie ergo confitetur credens, quia propter salutem nostram, et ut ad inconversibilitatem ligaret universitatem, universorum Conditor ex sanctissima semper Virgine Maria per conceptionem inviolabilem sine conversibilitate substantians sibimet animam intellectualem cum sensitivo corpore, natura factus est homo, malitiae alienus; totus Deus ipse, totus homo idem ipse; totus Deus pariter natura, et homo idem ipse. Deitate quidem divina per suam ipsius sanctissimam carnem non exsistentia natura carnis operans, humanitate vero humana non exsistentia natura deitatis. Nihil divinum nudum corpore operatur, nil
Bero and his followers admitted a confusion of the two natures in Christ, and acknowledged only one operation in Him. They believed that the divinity was passible, and that the humanity would be capable of the same operations which belonged to the Word alone. This opinion led them so far that they maintained that the Word was made man by a change of His divinity into human nature, and that man was made God by a change of human nature into divinity. In order to refute this impiety, St Hippolytus, 1st, teaches that the divine Word in assuming flesh and human nature suffered no change in His divinity; 2nd, he establishes two natures in Christ, the divine and the human, unconfused, and two operations and wills; 3rd, he expounds how God works through the flesh; 4th, from the two natures in Christ St Hippolytus further proves the distinct properties and operations; 5th, he demonstrates against Bero and his followers that there is one person in Christ; then he shows that the flesh cannot be changed into the divine nature, and that the human operation is distinct from the divine. Finally, from these things the holy Father concludes thus: Piously therefore does the believer confess that for our salvation, and that He might bind the universe to unchangeableness, the Creator of all things, from the most holy ever-Virgin Mary through an inviolable conception without changeableness substantiating for Himself an intellectual soul with a sensitive body, was made man by nature, foreign to malice; Himself wholly God, the same Himself wholly man; wholly God likewise by nature, and the same Himself man. By His divine deity indeed working through His own most holy flesh divine things not existing by the nature of flesh, and by His humanity human things not existing by the nature of deity. He works nothing divine bare of the body, doing nothing
Editors' notes and page, col. 305
Footnotes
(67) ‹anchor: docet Verbum› · call in col 305
Hippolyt. fragment. 1.
Hippolytus, fragment 1.
(printed under page 163)
(68) ‹anchor: astruit in Christo› · call in col 305
Idem fragment. 2.
The same, fragment 2.
(printed under page 163)
(69) ‹anchor: per carnem operetur› · call in col 305
Idem fragment. 3.
The same, fragment 3.
(printed under page 163)
(70) ‹anchor: probat S. Hippolytus› · call in col 305
Idem fragment. 4.
The same, fragment 4.
(printed under page 163)
(71) ‹anchor: esse personam› · call in col 305
Idem fragment. 5.
The same, fragment 5.
(printed under page 163)
(72) ‹anchor: distinctam esse› · call in col 305
Idem ibid.
The same, in the same place.
(printed under page 163)
(73) ‹anchor: sanctus Pater ita› · call in col 305
Idem fragmento 8.
The same, fragment 8.
(printed under page 163)
Page
- running head: 305 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A dustriae Anastasii,; B thecarium ita; C tationem passum; D Virginis Maria
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek words Ἅγιος, ἅγιος, ἅγιος); editors' matter: dustriae Anastasii (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); § III. Analysis horum excerptorum.; word split at start of column: [in]dustriae
humanum idem ipse privatum divinitate gerens, servans sibimet modum secundum utrumque immutabilem, per quem operatus est utraque decenti modo, ad approbationem perfectae, ac verae, nihilque habentis pravitatis inhumanationis suae. Itaque Bero quidem sic se habens, ut dixi, operationis monade deitatem Christi et humanitatem naturaliter simul confundens, et partiens personaliter, dissolvit vitam, ignorans solius connaturalium personarum connaturalis identitatis eamdem ipsam operationem esse significativam.
human, the same Himself, deprived of divinity, preserving for Himself a mode unchangeable according to each, through which He worked both in a fitting manner, for the confirmation of His perfect and true becoming man, which has nothing of depravity. Therefore Bero indeed, holding thus, as I have said, by the monad of operation naturally confounding together the deity and humanity of Christ, and dividing Him personally, dissolves life, being ignorant that the selfsame operation is significative only of the connatural identity of connatural persons.
ARTICULUS VIII.
ARTICLE VIII.
S. HIPPOLYTI TRACTATUS DE CHARISMATIBUS, ET HOMILIA IN THEOPHANIAM.
THE TREATISE OF ST HIPPOLYTUS ON CHARISMS, AND THE HOMILY ON THE THEOPHANY.
§ I. S. Hippolyti tractatus De charismatibus.
§ I. The treatise of St Hippolytus On Charisms.
Non solum ex auctoritate monumenti marmorei, sed etiam ex testimonio manuscriptorum codicum Viennensis, seu Vindobonensis, et Oxoniensis ad S. Hippolytum a viris eruditis Pearsonio et Fabricio refertur Περὶ χαρισμάτων ἀποστολικὴ παράδοσις, De charismatibus apostolica traditio, una cum aliis nonnullis, quae quidem jam pridem edita fuerunt in libro octavo Constitutionum apostolicarum, quas, cum ex variis secundi et tertii saeculi monumentis consarcinatae sint, Clementinas vulgo seu apostolicas solemus appellare, in lucem tamen prodierunt sine nomine S. Hippolyti. Quia vero in codice mss. Caesareo Vindobonensi, et altero Oxoniensi, in quibus Hippolyti nomen expressum est, quaedam aliter leguntur, quam in vulgatis Constitutionum libris, Albertus Fabricius illis inter opera S. Hippolyti locum concessit ex versione Latina Guil. Ernesti Grabe, quam versionem etiam Joannes Cotelerius adornavit. Agitur autem in hoc tractatu de charismatibus Spiritus sancti, cui deinde aliqua alia ex dicto libro octavo Constitutionum apostolicarum subjiciuntur.
Not only on the authority of the marble monument, but also on the testimony of the manuscript codices of Vienna, or Vindobona, and Oxford, there is referred to St Hippolytus by the learned men Pearson and Fabricius the Περὶ χαρισμάτων ἀποστολικὴ παράδοσις, Apostolic Tradition on Charisms, together with some other pieces, which indeed were published long ago in the eighth book of the Apostolic Constitutions, which, since they were patched together from various monuments of the second and third centuries, we are commonly wont to call Clementine or Apostolic, yet they came to light without the name of St Hippolytus. Because, however, in the Imperial manuscript codex of Vienna, and in the other of Oxford, in which the name of Hippolytus is expressed, certain things are read otherwise than in the published books of the Constitutions, Albert Fabricius granted them a place among the works of St Hippolytus from the Latin version of William Ernest Grabe, which version Jean Cotelier also prepared. Now this treatise deals with the charisms of the Holy Spirit, to which thereafter some other things from the said eighth book of the Apostolic Constitutions are subjoined.
Caeterum observant Patres Maurini, quod sanctus Hippolytus in tractatu De charismatibus ad cap. XII apostoli Pauli Epistolae I ad Corinthios fortasse respexerit, in quo varia Spiritus sancti dona commemorantur in ministerium Ecclesiae data. Indeque colligit perdoctus Scaliger S. Hippolytum nostrum, non in integros Scripturae sacrae libros, sed in selecta duntaxat loca commentarios exarasse. Sapientissimus Tillemontius hujus operis titulum cum subsequentis in laudato marmoreo monumento libri titulo conjungit, quem ita transponit, ut posteriorem primo loco, et primum ultimo loco ponat, atque ex duobus unum duntaxat titulum faciat, cui hunc sensum astruit: Traditio apostolica de charismatibus verisimiliter pro refutandis Montanistis. Hi tituli ita aduniti haberent
Moreover, the Maurist Fathers observe that St Hippolytus in the treatise On Charisms looked perhaps to chap. 12 of the First Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians, in which the various gifts of the Holy Spirit given for the ministry of the Church are commemorated. And from this the very learned Scaliger gathers that our St Hippolytus wrote commentaries not on whole books of sacred Scripture, but only on select passages. The most wise Tillemont joins the title of this work with the title of the following book on the aforesaid marble monument, which he so transposes that he places the latter in the first place and the first in the last place, and out of the two makes only one title, to which he assigns this sense: Apostolic Tradition on Charisms, probably for refuting the Montanists. These titles thus united would
Editors' notes and page, col. 306
Footnotes
(74) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 306 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Pearson., Vindic. Ignat., part. I, cap. 4.
Pearson, Vindiciae Ignatianae, part I, ch. 4.
(printed under page 163)
(75) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 306 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Fabric., tom. I Opp. S. Hippol., Praefat., pag. 7.
Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of St Hippolytus, Preface, p. 7.
(printed under page 163)
(76) ‹anchor: Patres Maurini› · call in col 306
Hist. littéraire de la France, tom. cit., pag. 386.
Histoire littéraire de la France, the volume cited, p. 386.
(printed under page 163)
(77) ‹anchor: refutandis Montanistis› · call in col 306
Tillemont., l. c., pag. 106.
Tillemont, at the place cited, p. 106.
(printed under page 163)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 306
- marginal letters: A humanum idem; B Non solum ex; C Constitutionum libris,; D libros, sed in
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek title quotation); editors' matter: humanum idem (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); ARTICULUS VIII.; word split at end of column: habe-[rent]
- other: the word haberent was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 307
sane aptissimum significatum ad multos difficultatum nodos secandos, dummodo haec Tillemontii conjectura tam certa esset ac ingeniosa. Ordo enim, quem in ea tabella observamus, non videtur eam transpositionem admittere. Post titulum tractatus De charismatibus, illico legimus sequentem in laudato lapideo monumento: Ἀποστολικὴ παράσοσις, apostolica traditio. Doctorum animos haec quaestio: quem librum is titulus annuntiet, varias in opiniones detraxit. Sententiam Tillemontii paulo antea exposuimus. Scaliger censet Hippolytum nostrum hoc sub titulo idem argumentum pertractasse, quod S. Irenaeus libro tertio adv. haereses, cap. 2 et 3 paucis duntaxat persecutus est. Le Moynius non discrepat ab hac opinione, dum arbitratur hoc opus disserere de doctrina seu traditione apostolica; quod inde colligit, quia tempore S. Hippolyti varia hujus generis, et quidem multa exstabant opera, atque adhuc conficiebantur. Nam cum haeretici [verba sunt doctissimi le Moynii] multa jactarent, quae tanquam ab apostolis hausta omnibus obtruderentur, orthodoxi, ut grassanti isti malo possent viam intercludere, et impedire quominus simplices et rudiores specie doctrinae apostolorum flecterentur et seducerentur, veram et genuinam apostolicae traditionis seriem repraesentarunt, ne splendida apostolorum auctoritate aliis fucus fieret, et illis illuderetur. Hinc traditio apostolorum ab Irenaeo vera repraesentata libro III, cap. 3, 4, etc. Nam cum Valentiniani et Gnostici multa figmenta et deliria credenda venditarent, utpote ab apostolis ipsis annuntiata et derivata; Irenaeus veram urget apostolorum traditionem et doctrinam, quam ab episcopis apostolorum successoribus et Ecclesiis, ubi apostolorum discipuli docuerunt, eruendam et derivandam contendit. Et primo urget Romanae Ecclesiae traditionem, ubi praefuit Clemens; Smyrnensis, ubi docuit Polycarpus; Ephesinae, ubi apostolus Joannes Evangelium tot annis et tanto cum fructu praedicaverat et promoverat. Sic paulo post Irenaeum, Hippolytus etiam scripsit suam Παράδοσιν ἀποστολικήν, ut haereticorum deliria et somnia refutaret, et doctrinam perpetuam apostolorum, in florentibus Ecclesiis superstitem et sinceram omnibus istis deliriis et erroribus opponeret..... Hinc etiam Παράδοσις ἀποστολικὴ ab Hippolyto adornata, id est narratio dogmatum, quae apostoli successoribus suis tradiderant, posteris, ad ultima mundi fata, tradenda et communicanda. Hactenus doctissimus le Moynius.
assuredly have a most fitting meaning for cutting many knots of difficulties, provided that this conjecture of Tillemont were as certain as it is ingenious. For the order which we observe in that tablet does not seem to admit that transposition. After the title of the treatise On Charisms, we immediately read the following on the aforesaid stone monument: Ἀποστολικὴ παράδοσις, Apostolic Tradition. This question, what book that title announces, has drawn the minds of the learned into various opinions. We have set forth the opinion of Tillemont a little before. Scaliger considers that our Hippolytus under this title treated thoroughly the same subject which St Irenaeus in the third book Against Heresies, chaps. 2 and 3, pursued in a few words only. Le Moyne does not differ from this opinion, while he judges that this work discourses concerning apostolic doctrine or tradition; which he gathers from the fact that in the time of St Hippolytus various, and indeed many, works of this kind were extant and were still being composed. For since the heretics [the words are those of the most learned Le Moyne] boasted of many things which were obtruded upon all as though drawn from the apostles, the orthodox, that they might be able to block the way to that rampant evil, and prevent the simple and more unlearned from being bent and seduced by the semblance of the doctrine of the apostles, set forth the true and genuine series of apostolic tradition, lest by the splendid authority of the apostles a deceit should be practised upon others and they should be mocked. Hence the true tradition of the apostles was set forth by Irenaeus in book III, chaps. 3, 4, etc. For since the Valentinians and Gnostics hawked about many figments and ravings to be believed, as having been announced and derived from the apostles themselves, Irenaeus urges the true tradition and doctrine of the apostles, which he contends must be drawn out and derived from the bishops, the successors of the apostles, and the Churches where the disciples of the apostles taught. And first he urges the tradition of the Roman Church, where Clement presided; of that of Smyrna, where Polycarp taught; of that of Ephesus, where the Apostle John had preached and promoted the Gospel for so many years and with so much fruit. Thus a little after Irenaeus, Hippolytus also wrote his Παράδοσις ἀποστολικήν, that he might refute the ravings and dreams of the heretics, and oppose the perpetual doctrine of the apostles, surviving and pure in flourishing Churches, to all those ravings and errors..... Hence also the Παράδοσις ἀποστολική prepared by Hippolytus, that is, a narrative of the dogmas which the apostles had handed down to their successors, to be handed down and communicated to posterity until the last destinies of the world. Thus far the most learned Le Moyne.
Alii censuerunt per tractatum sub titulo Traditio apostolica annuntiatum intelligi posse διδασκαλίαν, seu doctrinam sancti Hippolyti, quae in bibliotheca
Others have considered that by the treatise announced under the title Apostolic Tradition there can be understood the διδασκαλία, or Doctrine of St Hippolytus, which in the Bodleian
Editors' notes and page, col. 307
Footnotes
(78) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 307 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Scaliger, De emendat. temp. lib. VII, pag. 728.
Scaliger, De emendatione temporum, book VII, p. 728.
(printed under page 164)
(79) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 307 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, tom. II, pag. 1062 et seq.
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, vol. II, p. 1062 and following.
(printed under page 164)
(80) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 307 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Pearson., Vindic. Ignat., pag. 60 et 62.
Pearson, Vindiciae Ignatianae, pp. 60 and 62.
(printed under page 164)
Page
- running head: 307 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A rent sane aptissimum; B apostolica; quod; C et deliria credenda; D ἀποστολικὴ ab
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek titles and phrases); editors' matter: rent sane aptissimum (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [habe]rent; word split at end of column: biblio-[theca]
- other: the word bibliotheca was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 308
Bodleiana inter codices Baroccianos num. 26 et 185 exstat manu exarata teste Pearsonio et Grabio, atque in manuscripto Graeco apud Lambecium hunc prae se fert titulum: Διατάξεις τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων διὰ Ἱππολύτου. Pearsonius et Dodwellus asseverant hoc Hippolyti opusculum quoad maximam partem jam vulgatum esse in octavo Constitutionum apostolicarum libro, quamvis nonnulla aliter quandoque leguntur, ut Grabius monuit, qui pag. 286 illa Spicilegio Patrum tertii saeculi inserturum se pollicitus est. At ut verum fateamur, quidquid laudati critici disserere potuerunt, ut nobis aliqualem ideam suppeditarent, quid isthoc in opere S. Hippolyti contineretur, nequaquam excedit sphaeram merarum conjecturarum; neque nobis satis efficax videtur argumentum illud ex utroque manuscripto Vindobonensi et Oxoniensi petitum, quod nimirum in utroque mss. lib. VIII Constitutionum apostolicarum praefixum habeat nomen S. Hippolyti hoc sub titulo, Διδασκαλία τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων περὶ χαρισμάτων. Siquidem opus Constitutionum a posteriori manu et ab auctore saeculi quarti profectum esse passim eruditi arbitrantur.
Library among the Baroccian codices nos. 26 and 185 is extant in manuscript, as Pearson and Grabe testify, and in the Greek manuscript in Lambeck bears before it this title: Constitutions of the Holy Apostles through Hippolytus. Pearson and Dodwell assert that this little work of Hippolytus as regards the greatest part has already been published in the eighth book of the Apostolic Constitutions, although some things are sometimes read otherwise, as Grabe noted, who on p. 286 promised that he would insert them into his Spicilegium of the Fathers of the Third Century. Yet to confess the truth, whatever the aforesaid critics have been able to discourse in order to supply us with some sort of idea as to what was contained in that work of St Hippolytus, by no means exceeds the sphere of mere conjectures; nor does that argument drawn from both the Vienna and Oxford manuscripts seem to us sufficiently efficacious, namely that in both manuscripts book VIII of the Apostolic Constitutions has prefixed to it the name of St Hippolytus under this title, Teaching of the Holy Apostles concerning Charisms. Since indeed the learned everywhere judge that the work of the Constitutions proceeded from a later hand and from an author of the fourth century.
§ II. De sermone S. Hippolyti « in Sanctam Theophaniam. »
§ II. On the discourse of St Hippolytus "on the Holy Theophany."
Homiliam in Theophaniam, sive in Christi Salvatoris baptismum, edere voluit cl. Holstenius teste Lambecio tomo I Biblioth. Vindobon., pag. 111. Eamdemque homiliam Christiano Daumio ad manus fuisse notat Ittigius in dissertatione De Nativitatis Christi festo, pag. 395, post appendicem diss. De haeresiarchis. Quam habuit etiam Thomas Galeus teste Caveo. Incipit autem: Πάντα μὲν καλὰ καὶ καλὰ λίαν. Ex codice Thomae Galei Graece descriptam accepit eamdem homiliam a Wolfio Albertus Fabricius, eamque collectioni operum S. Hippolyti inseruit. Sancto huic martyri ascribendam esse ex solo fere titulo probari potest, quae conjectura, cum omnimodam certitudinem non praebeat, ulteriori crisi eruditorum relinquitur. Sane nihil S. Hippolyto incongruum complectitur, et praesentiam Dei Salvatoris nostri per suam incarnationem maxime in baptismo suo per vocem Patris de coelo delapsam manifestatam demonstrat.
The illustrious Holstenius wished to publish the Homily on the Theophany, or on the Baptism of Christ the Saviour, as Lambeck testifies in vol. I of the Bibliotheca Vindobonensis, p. 111. And Ittig notes in his dissertation On the Feast of the Nativity of Christ, p. 395, after the appendix of the dissertation On the Heresiarchs, that the same homily was in the hands of Christian Daum. Thomas Gale also had it, as Cave testifies. Now it begins: All things indeed are good, and very good. Albert Fabricius received the same homily transcribed in Greek from the codex of Thomas Gale through Wolf, and inserted it into the collection of the works of St Hippolytus. That it is to be ascribed to this holy martyr can be proved almost from the title alone, which conjecture, since it does not afford complete certainty, is left to the further criticism of the learned. Assuredly it comprises nothing incongruous with St Hippolytus, and demonstrates that the presence of God our Saviour through His incarnation was manifested especially in His baptism through the voice of the Father descending from heaven.
Observant doctissimi Maurini homiliam hanc abs S. Hippolyto pronuntiatam fuisse coram gentilibus. Haec singillatim pertractat de baptismo Jesu Christi, ejusque effectibus relate ad homines praesertim. Auctor orationem suam modo ad unam duntaxat, modo ad plures dirigit personas. Nihil
The most learned Maurists observe that this homily was delivered by St Hippolytus in the presence of Gentiles. It treats in detail of the baptism of Jesus Christ, and of its effects in relation to men especially. The author directs his discourse now to one person only, now to several. Nothing
Editors' notes and page, col. 308
Footnotes
(81) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 308 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Grabe, tom I, Spicileg. Patrum, pag. 285.
Grabe, Spicilegium Patrum, vol. I, p. 285.
(printed under page 164)
(82) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 308 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Lambec., lib. VIII, pag. 429, Biblioth. Vindobon.
Lambeck, Bibliotheca Vindobonensis, book VIII, p. 429.
(printed under page 164)
(83) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 308 (call not visible on the foot image; column inferred)
Cl. Grabius morte praeventus promissum exsolvere non potuit; verum Albert. Fabricius nactus eadem ad jam dictos mss. libros recensita a Grabio, qui Latina versione etiam illa donavit, tomo I Operum Hippolyti inseruit.
The distinguished Grabe, overtaken by death, could not fulfil his promise; but Albert Fabricius, having obtained the same pieces as revised by Grabe against the manuscripts already mentioned (Grabe also furnished them with a Latin version), inserted them in vol. I of the Works of Hippolytus.
(printed under page 164)
(84) ‹anchor: teste Caveo› · call in col 308
Cave, Hist. littér., tom. I.
Cave, Historia litteraria, vol. I.
(printed under page 164)
(85) ‹anchor: doctissimi Maurini› · call in col 308
Hist. littér. de la France, tom. I, pag. 370.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, p. 370.
(printed under page 164)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 308
- marginal letters: A theca Bodleiana; B rum; neque nobis; C nus fuisse notat; D strat.
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek titles and incipit); editors' matter: theca Bodleiana (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); § II. De sermone S. Hippolyti; word split at start of column: [biblio]theca
quoque in hoc discursu aut doctrinae, aut aetati S. Hippolyti inconveniens reperitur; quinimo sive stylum spectes, sive dicendi modum in aliis opusculis, quae indubie ipsius sunt, adhibitum, eumdem ipsissimum in hac homilia observamus. Notat insuper doctissimus Remigius Ceillier laudatam homiliam esse nitidam, aedificatoriam, dignamque sancto episcopo, necnon et satis elaboratam, atque longe politiorem caeteris communiter veterum Patrum homiliis.
also in this discourse is found unsuited either to the doctrine or to the age of St Hippolytus; nay rather, whether you look at the style or the manner of speaking employed in other little works which are undoubtedly his, we observe the very same in this homily. Moreover, the most learned Remi Ceillier notes that the aforesaid homily is neat, edifying, and worthy of the holy bishop, as well as fairly elaborate, and far more polished than the other homilies of the ancient Fathers commonly are.
Addunt praeterea Maurini, quosdam eruditos existimasse laudatam homiliam eamdem esse quam S. Hieronymus inter divi Hippolyti opera hoc sub titulo denotavit: Homilia scilicet de laude Salvatoris. Verum in praefata homilia non legitur illud, quod D. Hieronymus subjungit, nimirum sanctum nostrum in praesentia Origenis eamdem pronuntiasse. Fatemur quidem, quod ad difficultatem hanc extricandam quidam obtendant, factum hoc abs D. Hieronymo proditum merum esse errorem ex male intellecto capite 25 libri VI Eusebii enatum, quemque clarissimi viri Huetius et Valesius refutarunt. Verum hoc non tam certum, quemadmodum venditatur, habendum est. Siquidem Hieronymus hic non secundum Eusebium loquitur. Ipse enim de libris a seipso lectis disserit; quapropter verosimilius haec abs sancto doctore laudata homilia cum pluribus aliis ejusdem auctoris interiit, quemadmodum paulo inferius docebimus.
The Maurists add besides that certain learned men have considered that the aforesaid homily is the same as that which St Jerome denoted among the works of St Hippolytus under this title: namely, Homily on the Praise of the Saviour. Yet in the aforesaid homily there is not read that which St Jerome subjoins, namely that our saint delivered the same in the presence of Origen. We confess indeed that in order to clear up this difficulty certain persons allege that this fact handed down by St Jerome is a mere error sprung from a misunderstood chapter 25 of book VI of Eusebius, and which the most illustrious men Huet and Valesius have refuted. Yet this is not to be held as so certain as it is given out to be. Since indeed Jerome here does not speak according to Eusebius. For he himself discourses concerning books read by himself; wherefore more probably this homily praised by the holy doctor perished along with several others of the same author, just as we shall show a little below.
ARTICULUS IX.
ARTICLE IX.
DE CANONE PASCHALI S. HIPPOLYTI.
ON THE PASCHAL CANON OF ST HIPPOLYTUS.
§ I. S. Hippolyti Canon seu Cyclus Paschalis integre inventus an. 1551.
§ I. The Paschal Canon or Cycle of St Hippolytus found entire in the year 1551.
Canonem paschalem, seu Cyclum paschalem, a S. Hippolyto compositum, cujus Anatolius Laodicensis, Eusebius et S. Hieronymus meminerunt, Graece et Latine interprete eruditissimo Francisco Blanchinio, notisque Aegidii Bucherii et aliorum virorum doctissimorum illustratum, ultimo tandem loco, licet ob suam praestantiam et integritatem inter Hippolytea primo collocandus esset loco, recensemus. Perierat iste Canon cum caeteris ejusdem Hippolyti monumentis, nec ejus quidquam praeter nomen supererat; cum ecce bono Dei, et magna eruditorum omnium laetitia, ut Baronius, Scaliger, Gruterusque testantur, anno
The Paschal Canon, or Paschal Cycle, composed by St Hippolytus, of which Anatolius of Laodicea, Eusebius, and St Jerome have made mention, in Greek and Latin with the most learned Francesco Bianchini as translator, and illustrated with the notes of Gilles Boucher and of other most learned men, we review at last in the final place, although on account of its excellence and completeness it ought to be placed in the first place among the Hippolytean works. That Canon had perished along with the other monuments of the same Hippolytus, nor did anything of it survive except the name; when lo, by the goodness of God, and to the great joy of all the learned, as Baronius, Scaliger, and Gruter testify, in the year
Editors' notes and page, col. 309
Footnotes
(86) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 309
Remi Ceillier, Hist. génér. des auteurs, tom. II, pag. 329.
Remi Ceillier, Histoire générale des auteurs, vol. II, p. 329.
(printed under page 165)
(87) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 309
Hist. litt. de la France, tom. I, part. I, pag. 370.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, part I, p. 370.
(printed under page 165)
(88) ‹anchor: Anatolius Laodicensis› · call in col 309
Anatol. Laod. episc., praefat. ad Canon. paschal.
Anatolius, bishop of Laodicea, preface to the Paschal Canon.
(printed under page 165)
(89) ‹anchor: Eusebius› · call in col 309
Euseb., lib. VI H. E., cap. 22.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 22.
(printed under page 165)
(90) ‹anchor: S. Hieronymus› · call in col 309
Hieronym. in Catalog. de script. eccles., cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers, ch. 61.
(printed under page 165)
Page
- running head: 309 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A quoque in hoc; B illud, quod D.; C ARTICULUS IX.; D ejus quidquam
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: quoque in hoc (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); ARTICULUS IX.
Domini 1551, ex agro Verano non procul ab aede S. Laurentii ad Urbem e memoriae Hippolyti antiquae ruderibus effossa prodiit antiqua e marmore statua, solio insidens, Graecis utrinque litteris inscripta. Litterae in binis cathedrae laterculis cyclos paschales annorum sexdecim exhibebant; quartarum decimarum dextro, Dominicarum paschalium sinistro, utrosque centum duodecim annis universim comprehensos, qua annorum periodo ferias easdem in orbem redire credidit Hippolytus. Non erat quidem expressum Hippolyti nomen, sed facile ipsa heccaedecaeteridos methodo, et librorum lemmate, quod dextrum laterculum continebat, proditum est; eorum enim omnium auctorem Eusebius, Hieronymus, aliique Hippolytum episcopum faciunt. Tam illustre, tam rarum primitivae Ecclesiae monumentum Marcello Cervino tunc S. R. E. cardinali, postea etiam ejusdem nominis papae II, dignissimum visum quod Romam inde deferretur et in Vaticana bibliotheca conderetur; edidit deinde Graece, ut erat, cum antiquis suis inscriptionibus Gruterus; Scaliger etiam notis illustravit. Ego, inquit Bucherius, hic Latine fideliter redditum, non tam de novo explicare, quam paschalibus Victorii nostri Latinorumque primorum rationibus conformem, paucis ostendere constitui. Hactenus doctissimus Aegidius Bucherius.
of the Lord 1551, dug up from the Ager Veranus not far from the church of St Lawrence outside the Walls out of the ruins of the ancient memorial of Hippolytus, there came forth an ancient marble statue, sitting on a throne, inscribed on both sides with Greek letters. The letters on the two sides of the chair exhibited paschal cycles of sixteen years; that of the fourteenth moons on the right, that of the paschal Sundays on the left, both comprised altogether in a hundred and twelve years, in which period of years Hippolytus believed that the same days of the week returned in a circle. The name of Hippolytus indeed was not expressed, but it was easily betrayed by the very method of the sixteen-year cycle, and by the list of books which the right side contained; for Eusebius, Jerome, and others make Bishop Hippolytus the author of them all. So illustrious, so rare a monument of the primitive Church seemed to Marcello Cervini, then cardinal of the Holy Roman Church, afterwards also pope of the same name, the Second, most worthy of being brought from there to Rome and stored in the Vatican Library; Gruter then published it in Greek, as it was, with its ancient inscriptions; Scaliger also illustrated it with notes. I, says Boucher, have resolved not so much to explain anew what is here faithfully rendered in Latin, as to show in a few words that it conforms to the paschal calculations of our Victorius and of the first Latins. Thus far the most learned Gilles Boucher.
Hos autem binos sexdecennales canones in eadem cathedra lapidea insculptos fuisse, non una plane ratio suadet, ut recte animadvertit V. C. Joannes Vignolius. Prae caeteris, inquit, quae ejus creditur statua; quam ut eidem adhuc viventi positam existimemus, non illius aevi humilis Christianorum conditio, neque ipsius viri sanctitas omnino pati videtur. Atque ejus deinde librorum tituli, quorum in margine cathedrae mentio exstat; qui nonnisi post illius obitum ab alio appositi fuisse videntur, ut in ipsius honorem laudemque cederent. Quod cum ita sit, verisimile admodum esse reor, aliquid in eodem canone commissum fuisse, quod nullo pacto sancto Hippolyto est ascribendum. Nonnulla viri doctissimi jam praenotarunt, quae partim sculptoris inscitiam, partim alterius incuriam arguunt. Caeterum canonem Hippolyteum, post Josephum Scaligerum, Dionysium Petavium et Aegidium Bucherium, alii quoque recentiores, at maxime omnium V. C. Franciscus
Now that these two sixteen-year canons were engraved on the same stone chair, more than one reason clearly persuades us, as the illustrious Giovanni Vignoli rightly observes. Above all other things, he says, that which is believed to be his statue; which neither the humble condition of the Christians of that age, nor the sanctity of the man himself seems at all to allow us to consider to have been set up to him while he was still living. And next the titles of his books, of which mention is extant on the margin of the chair; which seem to have been placed there by another only after his death, that they might redound to his honour and praise. Which being so, I think it is very probable that some mistake was committed in the same canon which is by no means to be ascribed to St Hippolytus. Most learned men have already noted beforehand several things which prove partly the unskilfulness of the sculptor, partly the carelessness of another. Moreover, after Joseph Scaliger, Denis Petau, and Gilles Boucher, other more recent writers also, and most of all the illustrious Francesco
Editors' notes and page, col. 310
Footnotes
(91) ‹anchor: Aegidius Bucherius› · call in col 310
Bucher., De doctr. tempor., par. 292, in commentario suo ad Canonem paschalem Victorii Aquitani.
Bucherius, De doctrina temporum, p. 292, in his commentary on the Paschal Canon of Victorius of Aquitaine.
(printed under page 165)
(92) ‹anchor: Joannes Vignolius› · call in col 310
Vignol., Dissertat. de anno I Severi Alexandri, pag. 94.
Vignoli, Dissertation on the first year of Severus Alexander, p. 94.
(printed under page 165)
(93) ‹anchor: Josephum Scaligerum› · call in col 310
Scaliger., De emendat. tempor., lib. VII, pag. 721 et seqq.
Scaliger, De emendatione temporum, book VII, p. 721 and following.
(printed under page 165)
(94) ‹anchor: Dionysium Petavium› · call in col 310
Petav., De doctrina tempor., lib. II, pag. 61.
Petau, De doctrina temporum, book II, p. 61.
(printed under page 165)
(95) ‹anchor: Aegidium Bucherium› · call in col 310
Bucher., loc. cit.
Bucherius, at the place cited.
(printed under page 165)
(96) ‹anchor: recentiores› · call in col 310
Jo. Dom. Cassinus in academia Regia Paris. anno 1696 animadversiones suas in Hippolyti Canonem e scripto recitavit, de quibus vide Joan. Baptistam du Hamel in Regiae scientiarum academiae Historia, lib. IV, pag. 414 seq. Adeundus etiam Norisius dissertat. 2 De epochis Syro-Macedonum, p. 117-119; Antonius Pagi Crit.; Annal. Baronii ad annum 222, et Samuel Basnagius ad eumdem annum; Samuel Petitus; Stephanus le Moyne, et praeclarissimus Stephanus Evodius Assemanus archiepiscopus Apameae, in Praefatione generali ad Catalogum codicum mss. bibliothecae Vaticanae.
Giovanni Domenico Cassini, in the Royal Academy at Paris in 1696, read from a manuscript his observations on Hippolytus's Canon; on these see Jean-Baptiste du Hamel in the History of the Royal Academy of Sciences, book IV, p. 414 and following. One should also consult Noris, Dissertation 2 On the Eras of the Syro-Macedonians, pp. 117–119; Antoine Pagi's Critica on the Annals of Baronius at the year 222, and Samuel Basnage at the same year; Samuel Petit; Étienne Le Moyne; and the most illustrious Stefano Evodio Assemani, archbishop of Apamea, in the General Preface to the Catalogue of the Manuscripts of the Vatican Library.
(printed under page 165)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 310
- marginal letters: A Domini 1551,; B faciunt. Tam illustre,; C plane ratio suadet,; D phum Scaligerum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Domini 1551 (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
Blanchinius, luculenter illustrarunt. Hactenus eruditus Vignolius.
Bianchini, have splendidly illustrated the Hippolytean canon. Thus far the learned Vignoli.
Occasionem scribendi Canonis sive Cycli paschalis, judice Basnage, cui subscribit Remi Ceillier, praebuit S. Hippolyto controversia inter Ecclesias, de die celebrandi Paschatis diu ea aetate agitata, quod luna decima quarta mensis, in quemcunque demum hebdomadis diem incideret, more Judaico Asiani celebrabant: cum econtra Latina Ecclesia cum aliis omnibus Ecclesiis diem Dominicum fixum haberent.
The occasion of writing the Canon or Paschal Cycle, in the judgement of Basnage, with whom Remi Ceillier agrees, was afforded to St Hippolytus by the controversy among the Churches concerning the day of celebrating Pascha, long agitated in that age, because the Asians celebrated it after the Jewish custom on the fourteenth moon of the month, on whatever day of the week it might fall, whereas on the contrary the Latin Church with all the other Churches held the Lord's day fixed.
Caeterum bene observant Maurini nostri, hunc cyclum sexdecim annorum partem constituere duorum vel trium aliorum opusculorum S. Hippolyti de Paschate, de quibus paulo inferius sermo redibit. Ex Eusebii quoque verbis sequentibus: Eodem tempore et Hippolytus inter plurima alia ingenii sui monumenta librum de Pascha composuit; in quo temporum seriem describens, canonem quemdam paschalem per sexdecim annorum circuitum exhibens, anno primo imperatoris Alexandri computationem temporum circumscribit; jam collegit doctissimus Fabricius, inde apparere Canonem hunc fuisse clausulam operis De Paschate, in quo tempora Hippolytus digesserat usque ad primum Alexandri Severi annum, a quo Canon incipit. Idem S. Hippolyti cyclus, teste D. Hieronymo, occasionem praebuit Eusebio alium novemdecim annorum conficiendi. Anatolius Laodicenus episcopus in Syria, qui eumdem cyclum Hippolyteum viderat, fatetur quod S. Hippolytus non certas pro determinando Paschate regulas tradiderit. S. Isidorus Hispalensis episcopus ait primum fuisse S. Hippolytum nostrum, qui cyclum paschalem confecerit; atque, judice sapientissimo et indefesso antiquitatis scrutatore Tillemontio, Hippolyteus cyclus omnium vetustissimus habetur.
Moreover, our Maurists well observe that this cycle of sixteen years constitutes a part of two or three other little works of St Hippolytus on Pascha, of which we shall speak again a little below. From the following words of Eusebius also: At the same time Hippolytus also among very many other monuments of his genius composed a book on Pascha; in which describing the series of times, exhibiting a certain paschal canon through a circuit of sixteen years, he bounds the computation of times at the first year of the Emperor Alexander; the most learned Fabricius has already gathered that from this it appears that this Canon was the conclusion of the work On Pascha, in which Hippolytus had arranged the times down to the first year of Alexander Severus, from which the Canon begins. The same cycle of St Hippolytus, as St Jerome testifies, afforded an occasion to Eusebius for composing another of nineteen years. Anatolius, bishop of Laodicea in Syria, who had seen the same Hippolytean cycle, confesses that St Hippolytus did not hand down certain rules for determining Pascha. St Isidore, bishop of Seville, says that our St Hippolytus was the first who composed a paschal cycle; and in the judgement of the most wise and indefatigable investigator of antiquity, Tillemont, the Hippolytean cycle is held to be the most ancient of all.
§ II. Analysis Cycli Hippolytei.
§ II. Analysis of the Hippolytean Cycle.
In duas partes divisus est Cyclus paschalis S. Hippolyti. In prima parte sanctus Hippolytus designat, in quibus diebus mensium Martii et Aprilis
The Paschal Cycle of St Hippolytus is divided into two parts. In the first part St Hippolytus designates on what days of the months of March and April
Editors' notes and page, col. 311
Footnotes
(97) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 311
Blanchin., Diatriba, qua Canonem paschalem hunc Scaligero et Bucherio minus intellectum illustrat felicissime. Romae 1703, in-fol. Titulus libri est: De Calendario et Cyclo Caesaris, ac de Paschali Canone S. Hippolyti martyris dissertationes duae, ad Clementem XI pontificem maximum.
Bianchini, a Diatribe in which he most happily explains this Paschal Canon, less well understood by Scaliger and Bucherius. Rome 1703, folio. The title of the book is: Two dissertations on the Calendar and Cycle of Caesar, and on the Paschal Canon of St Hippolytus the martyr, to Clement XI, supreme pontiff.
(printed under page 166)
(98) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 311
Basnag., Annal. polit. eccl., ad ann. 222, pag. 288.
Basnage, Annales politico-ecclesiastici, at the year 222, p. 288.
(printed under page 166)
(99) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 311
Remi Ceillier, Hist. génér. des auteurs, tom. II, pag. 352.
Remi Ceillier, Histoire générale des auteurs sacrés, vol. II, p. 352.
(printed under page 166)
(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 311
Hist. litt. de la France, tom. I, part. I, pag. 366.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, part I, p. 366.
(printed under page 166)
(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 311
Euseb., H. E., lib. VI, cap. 22.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book VI, ch. 22.
(printed under page 166)
(3) ‹anchor: clarissimus Fabricius› · call in col 311
Fabric., Biblioth. Graec., tom. V, pag. 205.
Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca, vol. V, p. 205.
(printed under page 166)
(4) ‹anchor: teste D. Hieronymo› · call in col 311
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue [De viris illustribus], ch. 61.
(printed under page 166)
(5) ‹anchor: regulas tradiderit› · call in col 311
« E quibus Hippolytus XVI annorum circulum quibusdam lunae ignotis cursibus composuit. Alii XXV, alii XXX, nonnulli LXXXIV annorum circulum computantes, nunquam ad veram Paschae computandi rationem pervenerunt. » Anatolius apud Bucher., pag. 439.
"Of these, Hippolytus composed a cycle of sixteen years on certain courses of the moon unknown [to others]. Others, reckoning a cycle of twenty-five years, others of thirty, some of eighty-four, never arrived at the true method of computing Easter." Anatolius, in Bucherius, p. 439.
(printed under page 166)
(6) ‹anchor: episcopus ait› · call in col 311
« Paschalem Cyclum Hippolytus episcopus temporibus Alexandri imperatoris primus conscripsit. » Isidor., lib. VI Originum, cap. 16, pag. 77.
"Hippolytus the bishop, in the times of the emperor Alexander, was the first to write out a Paschal Cycle." Isidore, Etymologies (Origines) book VI, ch. 16, p. 77.
(printed under page 166)
(7) ‹anchor: omnium vetustissimus habetur› · call in col 311
Tillemont, Mémoir., tom. III, pag. 105.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, p. 105.
(printed under page 166)
Page
- running head: 311 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A Blanchinius (97),; B redibit. Ex Eusebii; C viderat, fatetur; D (97) Blanchin.,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Blanchinius (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); § II. Analysis Cycli Hippolytei.
quarta decima luna evenire possit; revolutio sexdecim annorum septies in se ducta, determinat festum Paschatis pro centum et duodecim annis, id est a primo anno Alexandri Severi, qui congruit cum anno 222 Jesu Christi, usque ad annum 333. Ex titulo exordio Cycli paschalis praefixo extra dubitationis aleam ponitur initium imperii Alexandri Severi anno 222, ex quo potentissimo argumento Baronii chronologia et Onuphrii refellitur atque corrigitur. Ille cum anno Domini 224, hic cum 223 primum Alexandri copulat. Jam vero in primo Alexandri imperatoris anno, Aprilis decimus tertius feriae VII cohaerebat, teste Hippolyti Canone, quam frustra feriam quaerimus anno sive 223, sive 224. Idus Apriles in primam feriam incidunt anno 223, quia littera Dominicalis E, epacta solaris 3; anno vero 224, qui est bissextilis, Idus Apriles, ad feriam tertiam pertinent, jubentibus et litteris Dominicalibus D, C, et epactis solaribus 4, 5. Et sane S. Hippolytus scribit, quod primo anno imperii Alexandri luna decima quarta in Sabbato contigerit, qui fuit Idus Aprilium, id est decimus tertius mensis Aprilis. Jam vero certum est Idus Aprilium, seu decimum tertium hujus mensis non incidisse in Sabbatum nisi annis 216, 222 et 231. Observatu ita dignum est in hac inscriptione: 1° quod S. Hippolytus primo post Paschatis festum primum regiminis Alexandri inchoet annum; 2° quod hoc anno mensis Aprilis fuerit intercalaris; 3° quod finem jejunium paschale habuerit Dominica die Paschatis; 4° quod cyclus paschalis S. Hippolyti non sit penitus illius inventum, sed quod sequatur praxin jam ante ipsum stabilitam.
the fourteenth moon can fall; a revolution of sixteen years multiplied seven times into itself determines the feast of Pascha for a hundred and twelve years, that is, from the first year of Alexander Severus, which agrees with the year 222 of Jesus Christ, down to the year 333. From the title prefixed to the beginning of the Paschal Cycle, the beginning of the reign of Alexander Severus in the year 222 is placed beyond the hazard of doubt, by which most powerful argument the chronology of Baronius and of Onuphrius is refuted and corrected. The former joins the first year of Alexander with the year of the Lord 224, the latter with 223. Now in the first year of the Emperor Alexander, the thirteenth of April was joined to the seventh day of the week, as the Canon of Hippolytus testifies, which day of the week we seek in vain either in the year 223 or in 224. The Ides of April fall on the first day of the week in the year 223, because the Dominical letter is E, the solar epact 3; while in the year 224, which is bissextile, the Ides of April belong to the third day of the week, as both the Dominical letters D, C, and the solar epacts 4, 5 require. And assuredly St Hippolytus writes that in the first year of the reign of Alexander the fourteenth moon fell on the Sabbath, which was the Ides of April, that is, the thirteenth of the month of April. Now it is certain that the Ides of April, or the thirteenth of this month, did not fall on the Sabbath except in the years 216, 222, and 231. Thus it is worthy of observation in this inscription: 1st, that St Hippolytus begins the first year of the reign of Alexander first after the feast of Pascha; 2nd, that in this year the month of April was intercalary; 3rd, that the paschal fast had its end on the Lord's day of Pascha; 4th, that the paschal cycle of St Hippolytus is not wholly his own invention, but that he follows a practice already established before him.
In secunda parte indicat dies quibus celebrandum est Pascha. Hoc festum semper notatur die Dominica. Quando luna decima quarta incidit in Sabbatum, Pascha celebrandum non est Dominica sequenti, quae est decima quinta lunae, sed transferendum est ad Dominicam post hanc, id est, ad vicesimam secundam lunae diem. Ratio hujus praxeos
In the second part he indicates the days on which Pascha is to be celebrated. This feast is always marked on the Lord's day. When the fourteenth moon falls on the Sabbath, Pascha is not to be celebrated on the following Lord's day, which is the fifteenth day of the moon, but is to be transferred to the Lord's day after this, that is, to the twenty-second day of the moon. The reason of this practice
Editors' notes and page, col. 312
Footnotes
(8) ‹anchor: mensis Aprilis› · call in col 312
« Anno primo regiminis Alexandri imperatoris facta est XIV Paschae Idibus Aprilibus, Sabbato, cum mensis embolymaeus fuisset. Erit sequentibus annis, sicut in tabula subjectum est. Evenit vero in praeteritis, sicut indicatum est; solvere autem oportet jejunium, ubi Dominica inciderit. » S. Hippolytus in Canone paschali.
"In the first year of the reign of the emperor Alexander the fourteenth [day] of the Pasch fell on the Ides of April, a Saturday, the month having been intercalary. In the following years it will be as set out below in the table. In past years it fell as is indicated; and one must break the fast where the Sunday falls." St Hippolytus, in the Paschal Canon.
(printed under page 166)
(9) ‹anchor: inchoet annum› · call in col 312
« Anno primo regiminis Alexandri imperatoris facta est XIV Paschae Idibus April. » Idem ibid.
"In the first year of the reign of the emperor Alexander the fourteenth of the Pasch fell on the Ides of April." The same, ibid.
(printed under page 166)
(10) ‹anchor: fuerit intercalaris› · call in col 312
« Sabbato, cum mensis embolymaeus fuisset. » Idem ibid.
"On a Saturday, the month having been intercalary." The same, ibid.
(printed under page 166)
(11) ‹anchor: die Paschatis› · call in col 312
« Solvere autem oportet jejunium, ubi Dominica inciderit. » Idem ibid.
"And one must break the fast where the Sunday falls." The same, ibid.
(printed under page 166)
(12) ‹anchor: ante ipsum stabilitam› · call in col 312
« Erit sequentibus annis, sicut in tabula subjectum est; evenit vero in praeteritis, sicut indicatum est. » Idem ibid.
"In the following years it will be as set out below in the table; in past years it fell as is indicated." The same, ibid.
(printed under page 166)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 312
- marginal letters: A quarta decima; B cidunt anno 223,; C calaris (10); 3°; D psit. » Isidor.,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: quarta decima (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
est, quia S. Hippolytus, quemadmodum et Latini, non voluerunt ut Pascha eo die ageretur quo Dominus noster crucifixus fuit. Christiani Alexandrini alium sequebantur calculum, hi enim celebrabant Pascha a decima quinta luna; cum econtra juxta cyclum S. Hippolyti et Victorii nonnisi a decima sexta celebrandum esset. Notandum insuper, quod juxta eumdem hunc cyclum Pascha omnibus Dominicis a decima tertia Kalendarum Aprilium, seu a vicesima Martii usque ad undecimam Kalendarum Maii, seu vicesimam Aprilis celebrari posset. Inde colligitur S. Hippolytum aequinoctium, seu solis in Arietem ingressum non cum XXI Martii, ut Nicaeni Patres, neque cum XXII, ut passim Anatolio tribuunt; sed cum XVIII Martii comparasse ex nonnullorum veterum et celebrium astrologorum sententia, praesertim Metonis et Eudoxi, qui jam ante annos plus quam 400 ante nativitatem Jesu Christi aequinoctium vernale ad XVIII Martii restrinxerunt. Cum quibus Judaeos consensisse Josephus eorum historicus insinuat. Adeo verum est, neque Judaeis veteribus, neque Christianis per duo priora saecula astronomicum aequinoctii diem agnitum, non certe tanto scrupulo observatum: cum hi nullo ad eas tricas otio, vix ulla a tot persecutionibus respiratione, nihil supra id, quod hactenus a Synagoga usurpatum videbant, inquirendum putarent, curarentve, nec mensem novorum, solum a Scriptura memoratum, alio quam Judaei sensu interpretarentur.
is because St Hippolytus, just as the Latins also, did not wish that Pascha should be kept on the day on which our Lord was crucified. The Alexandrian Christians followed another calculation, for they celebrated Pascha from the fifteenth moon; whereas on the contrary according to the cycle of St Hippolytus and of Victorius it was not to be celebrated save from the sixteenth. It is to be noted moreover that according to this same cycle Pascha could be celebrated on all Lord's days from the thirteenth before the Kalends of April, or from the twentieth of March, down to the eleventh before the Kalends of May, or the twentieth of April. From this it is gathered that St Hippolytus matched the equinox, or the entrance of the sun into Aries, not with the 21st of March, as the Nicene Fathers do, nor with the 22nd, as they everywhere attribute to Anatolius, but with the 18th of March according to the opinion of several ancient and celebrated astronomers, especially Meton and Eudoxus, who already more than 400 years before the nativity of Jesus Christ restricted the vernal equinox to the 18th of March. With whom Josephus their historian intimates that the Jews agreed. So true is it that neither by the ancient Jews nor by the Christians through the first two centuries was the astronomical day of the equinox recognized, certainly not observed with so great scruple: since the latter, having no leisure for those niceties, and scarcely any breathing-space from so many persecutions, thought and cared to inquire into nothing beyond that which they saw hitherto used by the Synagogue, nor did they interpret the month of new corn, alone mentioned by Scripture, in another sense than the Jews.
Nec illud hic omittendum, Hippolytum constituti a synodo Caesariensi limitis paschalis finem non excedere, licet initium biduo antevertat. Ea enim synodus ab XI Kalend. April., seu XXII Martii, ad XI Kalendas Maii, seu XXI Aprilis inclusive per 31 dies Pascha ἀναστάσιμον, seu Dominicas paschales concludit, Hippolytus ab XIII Kalend. April., seu Martii XX, ad XI Kalendas Maii per dies omnino 33 extendit.
Nor is this to be omitted here, that Hippolytus does not exceed the end of the paschal limit established by the Synod of Caesarea, although he anticipates the beginning by two days. For that synod encloses the resurrectional Pascha, or the paschal Lord's days, from the 11th before the Kalends of April, or the 22nd of March, to the 11th before the Kalends of May, or the 21st of April inclusive, through 31 days; Hippolytus extends them from the 13th before the Kalends of April, or the 20th of March, to the 11th before the Kalends of May, through 33 days in all.
§ III. Nota ad Canonem paschalem S. Hippolyti facilius intelligendum.
§ III. Note for understanding more easily the Paschal Canon of St Hippolytus.
NOTA I. Canon paschalis S. Hippolyti hodiernis quidem usibus pro inveniendo vero Paschatis die servire vix potest, cum modo post accuratas observationes astronomicas, aequinoctio, et cyclis solis et lunae, epactis, et litteris Dominicalibus rite determinatis, et correctionem Gregorianam Calendarii factam tabulae paschales modernae ab hoc Canone non parum differant. Quia tamen hic Canon, utpote in Ecclesia primus et antiquissimus, venerabile est antiquitatis monumentum, et accurata ejus
NOTE I. The Paschal Canon of St Hippolytus can indeed scarcely serve for present-day uses for finding the true day of Pascha, since now after accurate astronomical observations, with the equinox, and the cycles of the sun and moon, the epacts, and the Dominical letters duly determined, and the Gregorian correction of the Calendar made, modern paschal tables differ not a little from this Canon. Because nevertheless this Canon, as being the first and most ancient in the Church, is a venerable monument of antiquity, and its accurate
Editors' notes and page, col. 313
Footnotes
(13) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 313
Victorius Lemovicensis, scriptor saeculi quinti testatur quod is erat Latinae Ecclesiae mos: « Sin autem die Sabbati plenilunium esse contigerit, et consequenti Dominico lunam XV reperiri; eadem hebdomade transmissa, in alteram diem Dominicam, id est, lunam XXII transferri debere Pascha dixerunt. » Victor. apud Bucher. De Cycl. pasch., p. 4. Haec praxis adhuc in usu erat tempore Gregorii Turonensis, quemadmodum ille scribit lib. X Hist. Francorum, num. 23. Observantur in Cyclo S. Hippolyti plura exempla translati Paschatis, cum illud in diem XV lunae incideret, sc. anno I, IV, X, XIII, XVI, III. Nunc peragimus Pascha XV lunae, quando incidit in Dominicam, in quo rationes Alexandrinorum sequimur.
Victorius of Limoges, a writer of the fifth century, testifies that this was the custom of the Latin Church: "But if the full moon should happen on the Sabbath day, and the fifteenth moon be found on the following Sunday, they said that, that week being passed over, Easter must be transferred to the next Sunday, that is, to the twenty-second moon." Victorius, in Bucherius, De doctrina temporum / De cyclis paschalibus, p. 4. This practice was still in use in the time of Gregory of Tours, as he writes in book X of the History of the Franks, no. 23. In the Cycle of St Hippolytus several examples are seen of Easter transferred when it would fall on the fifteenth moon, namely in years I, IV, X, XIII, XVI, III. Now we keep Easter on the fifteenth moon when it falls on a Sunday, in which we follow the reckoning of the Alexandrians.
(printed under page 167)
(14) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 313
Vid. Columel. lib. IX, cap. 14, et lib. XI, cap. 20. Bucher. De cyclo Judaeorum, pag. 345.
See Columella, book IX, ch. 14, and book XI, ch. 20. Bucherius, De cyclo Judaeorum, p. 345.
(printed under page 167)
Page
- running head: 313 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A est, quia S.; B tentia (14), praesertim; C interpretarentur.; D et lunae, epactis,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek word ἀναστάσιμον); editors' matter: est, quia S. Hippolytus (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); § III. Nota ad Canonem paschalem S. Hippolyti
explicatio ad mentem S. Hippolyti aegre cognoscitur, cum, uti dictum fuit, tractatus, quem de illo ipse exaravit, deperditus fuit; ideo multi eruditi viri, uti Scaliger, Petavius, Bucherius, Vignolius, le Moynius et Blanchinius, in illo explicando laborarunt, quorum scripta et notas Albertus Fabricius collectioni operum sancti Hippolyti inseruit. Pro nostro autem instituto sufficiet ea hic adnotare, quae ad rectum hujus Canonis intellectum ex citatis auctoribus colligi possunt.
explanation according to the mind of St Hippolytus is known with difficulty, since, as has been said, the treatise which he himself wrote concerning it has been lost; therefore many learned men, such as Scaliger, Petau, Boucher, Vignoli, Le Moyne, and Bianchini, have laboured in explaining it, whose writings and notes Albert Fabricius inserted into the collection of the works of St Hippolytus. For our purpose, however, it will suffice to note here those things which can be gathered from the cited authors for the right understanding of this Canon.
NOTA II. Prior igitur tabula 1° ostendit plenilunia paschalia, incipiendo ab anno Christi 222, qui, uti Vignolius in dissertatione De anno primo imperii Severi Alexandri, Valsecchius et Philippus a Turre demonstrant, est annus primus Severi Alexandri imperatoris.
NOTE II. The first table therefore, 1st, shows the paschal full moons, beginning from the year of Christ 222, which, as Vignoli in his dissertation On the First Year of the Reign of Severus Alexander, Valsecchi, and Filippo del Torre demonstrate, is the first year of the Emperor Severus Alexander.
2° Litterae alphabeti denotant seriem hebdomadae, in quam dictum plenilunium incidit. V. g. anno Christi 222, plenilunium paschale contingebat Idibus Aprilis, et littera G apposita illud in diem Sabbati incidisse indicat.
2nd, The letters of the alphabet denote the day of the week on which the said full moon falls. For example, in the year of Christ 222, the paschal full moon fell on the Ides of April, and the letter G placed beside it indicates that it fell on the day of the Sabbath.
3° In prima columna descendendo sequuntur sexdecim anni incipiendo ab anno 222, per numeros designati, et similiter in reliquis sex columnis, quae septem heccaedecaeterides, seu sedecennia, annos 112 efficiunt.
3rd, In the first column descending there follow sixteen years beginning from the year 222, designated by numbers, and similarly in the remaining six columns, which seven sixteen-year cycles, or periods of sixteen years, make up 112 years.
4° Post primum sedecennium plenilunium in eumdem quidem diem, scilicet Idus Aprilis incidit, juxta hypothesin S. Hippolyti, non vero in eamdem feriam, sed una feria citius occurrit. V. g. in primo sedecennio plenilunium in G, id est, Sabbato occurrit; in secundo sedecennio erit in F, id est, feria sexta; in tertio in E, seu feria quinta, et sic deinceps; absolutis autem septem sedecenniis, seu 112 annis, in eumdem diem et eamdem feriam recurret.
4th, After the first sixteen-year period the full moon falls indeed on the same day, namely the Ides of April, according to the hypothesis of St Hippolytus, yet not on the same day of the week, but occurs one day of the week earlier. For example, in the first sixteen-year period the full moon occurs on G, that is, on the Sabbath; in the second sixteen-year period it will be on F, that is, the sixth day of the week; in the third on E, or the fifth day of the week, and so on; and when the seven sixteen-year periods, or 112 years, have been completed, it will recur on the same day and the same day of the week.
5° Per voces illas Esdras, Genesis Christi, Ezechias, etc., juxta Blanchinium praecipua Paschata designantur, quorum S. Scriptura meminit, scilicet Exodi XII. Primum Pascha IV Non. April., vel juxta Danielem, Nonis April. Secundum in eremo Num. IX. Tertium sub Josue, seu Jesu, Jos. III, XII Kal. April. Item Pascha sub Ezechia, II Paralip. XXX; sub Josia, IV Reg. XXIII; sub Esdra, I Esdrae VI. Item in Genesi, et Passione Christi. Verba vero illa, secundum Danielem, significant aliam chronologiam horum Paschatum, cum ex Danielis libro ejusdemque hebdomadibus diversimode numeratis epocham superioris aetatis a templo condito ad restauratum a Cyro paulo diversam chronologi colligant.
5th, By those words Esdras, Genesis of Christ, Hezekiah, etc., according to Bianchini the principal Passovers are designated of which sacred Scripture makes mention, namely Exodus 12. The first Passover on the 4th before the Nones of April, or according to Daniel, on the Nones of April. The second in the wilderness, Numbers 9. The third under Joshua, or Jesus, Joshua 3, on the 12th before the Kalends of April. Likewise the Passover under Hezekiah, 2 Paralipomenon 30; under Josiah, 4 Kings 23; under Esdras, 1 Esdras 6. Likewise in the Nativity and the Passion of Christ. And those words, according to Daniel, signify another chronology of these Passovers, since from the book of Daniel and its weeks numbered in different ways chronologers gather a slightly different epoch of the earlier age from the building of the temple to its restoration by Cyrus.
NOTA III. Altera tabula exhibet Dominicas Paschales
NOTE III. The other table exhibits the Paschal Lord's
Editors' notes and page, col. 314
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 314
- marginal letters: A explicatio ad; B xandri imperatoris.; C feriam, sed una; D Item in Genesi,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: explicatio ad mentem (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: Pascha-[les]
- other: the word Paschales was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 315
per septem sedecennia incipiendo ab anno Christi 222, eodem modo quo plenilunia paschalia in priori tabula sunt disposita; ubi tamen notandum, quod si plenilunium in Sabbatum inciderit, Dominica sequens non sit paschalis, uti Alexandrini observabant, sed more Latinorum Pascha altera Dominica eam subsequente celebratum olim fuerit. Sic, v. g., anno 222, plenilunium incidebat in Idus Aprilis Sabbato; Dominica paschalis non erat XVIII Kal. Maii, more Alexandrinorum, sed more Latinorum XI Kal. Maii. Anno 223, plenilunium erat IV Nonas Aprilis, feria quarta; Dominica paschalis VIII Idus Aprilis. Item in secunda columna, seu secundo sedecennio, sive anno Christi 238, plenilunium erat Idibus Aprilis, feria sexta, et Dominica paschalis XVII Kal. Maii; et ita deinceps per reliqua sedecennia, quibus absolutis plenilunium in eumdem diem primi sedecennii, et feriam, et consequenter etiam Dominica paschalis in eumdem diem recurrit. Atque hoc videtur esse systema Canonis paschalis S. Hippolyti. Plura videri possunt apud laudatos auctores.
days through seven sixteen-year periods beginning from the year of Christ 222, in the same way in which the paschal full moons are arranged in the former table; where nevertheless it is to be noted that if the full moon falls on the Sabbath, the following Lord's day is not paschal, as the Alexandrians observed, but after the custom of the Latins Pascha was formerly celebrated on the second Lord's day following it. Thus, for example, in the year 222, the full moon fell on the Ides of April on the Sabbath; the paschal Lord's day was not the 18th before the Kalends of May, after the custom of the Alexandrians, but after the custom of the Latins the 11th before the Kalends of May. In the year 223, the full moon was on the 4th before the Nones of April, the fourth day of the week; the paschal Lord's day on the 8th before the Ides of April. Likewise in the second column, or second sixteen-year period, or the year of Christ 238, the full moon was on the Ides of April, the sixth day of the week, and the paschal Lord's day on the 17th before the Kalends of May; and so on through the remaining sixteen-year periods, upon the completion of which the full moon recurs on the same day of the first sixteen-year period, and day of the week, and consequently also the paschal Lord's day recurs on the same day. And this seems to be the system of the Paschal Canon of St Hippolytus. More may be seen in the aforesaid authors.
CAPUT III.
CHAPTER III.
DE FRAGMENTIS OPERUM S. HIPPOLYTI ET DE DEPERDITIS.
ON THE FRAGMENTS OF THE WORKS OF ST HIPPOLYTUS AND ON THE LOST WORKS.
ARTICULUS I.
ARTICLE I.
DE COMMENTARIIS S. HIPPOLYTI IN LIBROS VETERIS ET NOVI TESTAMENTI.
ON THE COMMENTARIES OF ST HIPPOLYTUS ON THE BOOKS OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT.
§ I. Commentarius S. Hippolyti in Genesin et in Hexaemeron.
§ I. The Commentary of St Hippolytus on Genesis and on the Hexaemeron.
Exiguus est scriptorum, quae exstant, S. Hippolyti numerus, si cum iis conferas, quae inter deperdita numeramus. Haec certe jactura, quae sentitur magis per subjectam collectionem titulorum, et enarrationem succinctam quam post veteres de cunctis viri sancti commentationibus hodie desideratis exhibebimus, quaeve stupenda videtur. Nulla prope Scripturae pars, cui non explicandae aut enodandis in ea difficultatibus ingenium exercuerit, multa quoque idem de rebus aliis religionis et Ecclesiae gravissimis elucubratus est. Ineamus numerum:
Scant is the number of the writings of St Hippolytus which are extant, if you compare them with those which we number among the lost. Assuredly this is a loss which is felt the more through the subjoined collection of titles and the succinct account which after the ancients we shall exhibit concerning all the treatises of the holy man that are missed today, and which seems stupendous. There is almost no part of Scripture in explaining which or in unravelling the difficulties in it he did not exercise his genius, and he also composed many treatises on other most weighty matters of religion and of the Church. Let us enter upon the enumeration:
Eusebius et S. Hieronymus nos certiores reddunt sanctum Hippolytum exarasse commentarium in Hexaemeron, seu tractatum de sex diebus creationis mundi. Cl. le Moynius praetendit hoc opus esse primum inter ea, quae in tabula Graeca, cum statua nostri sancti e terris effossa, et continente plurium aliorum ipsius scriptorum titulos, designantur; atque suspicatur ultimas syllabas vocum ΙΟΥC et ΝΙΑC, ex quibus Scaliger et Bucherius faciunt ΨΑΛΜΟΥC ΜΕΤΑΝΟΙΑC, Psalmos poenitentiales, esse reliquias vocum εἰς προτοπλάστους, et περὶ κοσμογονίας, vel ζωογονίας, quae
Eusebius and St Jerome inform us that St Hippolytus wrote a commentary on the Hexaemeron, that is, a treatise on the six days of the creation of the world. The distinguished Le Moyne maintains that this work is the first among those which are designated on the Greek tablet that was dug out of the earth with the statue of our saint and contains the titles of many other writings of his; and he suspects that the last syllables of the words ΙΟΥC and ΝΙΑC, out of which Scaliger and Bucherius make ΨΑΛΜΟΥC ΜΕΤΑΝΟΙΑC, penitential psalms, are the remains of the words εἰς προτοπλάστους and περὶ κοσμογονίας, or ζωογονίας, which
Editors' notes and page, col. 315
Footnotes
(15) ‹anchor: Eusebius› · call in col 315
« Eodem tempore et Hippolytus... scripsit εἰς τὴν ἑξαήμερον, καὶ εἰς τὰ μετὰ τὴν ἑξαήμερον, in opus sex dierum, et in ea quae post sex dies consecuta sunt. » Euseb., H. E. lib. VI, cap. 22.
"At the same time Hippolytus also ... wrote On the Hexaemeron, and on what follows the Hexaemeron [Greek, then Latin], on the work of the six days, and on what followed after the six days." Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 22.
(printed under page 168)
(16) ‹anchor: S. Hieronymus› · call in col 315
« Hippolytus... scripsit nonnullos in Scripturas commentarios, e quibus hos reperi: In Hexaemeron, et in Exodum, in Canticum canticorum, in Genesim et in Zachariam. » Hieronym. in Cat., 61.
"Hippolytus ... wrote a number of commentaries on the Scriptures, of which I have found these: on the Hexaemeron, and on Exodus, on the Song of Songs, on Genesis and on Zechariah." Jerome, in the Catalogue, 61.
(printed under page 168)
(17) ‹anchor: Psalmos poenitentiales› · call in col 315
Merito alii eruditi hanc Scaligeri conjecturam respuunt, quia in tertio inscriptionis versu mentio est operis in Psalmos, et divisio Psalmorum in poenitentiales posterior est aetate Hippolyti.
Other scholars rightly reject this conjecture of Scaliger, because in the third line of the inscription there is mention of a work on the Psalms, and the division of the Psalms into penitential ones is later than Hippolytus's time.
(printed under page 168)
Page
- running head: 315 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A les per septem; B ARTICULUS I.; C clesiae gravissimis
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek title fragments); editors' matter: les per septem (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); CAPUT III. DE FRAGMENTIS OPERUM S. HIPPOLYTI ET DE DEPERDITIS. (spanning heading across cols. 315–316); upper block of col. 315 continues at top of col. 316, lower block continues in lower block of col. 316; word split at start of column: [Pascha]les; misprint kept as printed: προτοπλάστους (for πρωτοπλάστους), last paragraph (added Q2a); the lower block's final paragraph (Eusebius ... quae) was missing and was set by Q2a; it runs on into col 316's lower block
Eusebius et S. Hieronymus nos certiores reddunt sanctum Hippolytum exarasse commentarium in Hexaemeron, seu tractatum de sex diebus creationis mundi. Cl. le Moynius praetendit hoc opus esse primum inter ea, quae in tabula Graeca, cum statua nostri sancti e terris effossa, et continente plurium aliorum ipsius scriptorum titulos, designantur; atque suspicatur ultimas syllabas vocum ΙΟΥϹ et ΝΙΑϹ, ex quibus Scaliger et Bucherius faciunt ΨΑΛΜΟΥϹ ΜΕΤΑΝΟΙΑϹ, Psalmos poenitentiales, esse reliquias vocum εἰς προτοπλάστους, et περὶ κοσμογονίας, vel ζωογονίας, quae designent Hippolyti lucubrationes εἰς τὰ μετὰ τὴν ἑξαήμερον, et εἰς τὴν ἑξαήμερον. Juxta hanc igitur interpretationem le Moynii scripsisset S. Hippolytus commentaria in primum et secundum caput Geneseos, seu in Hexaemerum, et de iis quae Deus sex diebus condiderat, et de iis quae proprie hominem et illius in paradisum collocationem spectabant; seu, ut paucis dicam, juxta le Moynium scripsisset commentarium de statu protoparentum, de creatione mundi, et de rebus viventibus. Verum, licet haec opinio sit ingeniosior et magis naturalis quam illa Scaligeri de Psalmis poenitentialibus, fatendum tamen neutram certiorem esse. Utraque enim unice dependet ab imaginatione; et sic quidem tertius, qui hic ingenio suo indulgere vellet, adhuc aliud posset eruere, quod forte magis ad verum accederet. Et sane doctorum virorum Thomae Galei et Eduardi Bernhardi conjecturae, qui ex reliquiis litterarum ΙΟΥϹ divinantur Ἰουδαίους, ita ut sensus integer sit Ἀπόδειξις πρὸς τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, vel κατὰ τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, demonstratio adversus Judaeos, eruditis pluribus non displicent. Ut ut autem haec sint, hoc nihilominus verum est, S. Hippolytum composuisse Hexaemeron. Sanctus Joannes Damascenus suis in Parallelis nobis fragmentum aliquod hujus scripti conservavit, quod complectitur refutationem eorum qui paradisum terrestrem in coelo collocabant, atque exinde inficiabantur eumdem esse e numero creaturarum hujus universi. Quinimo sanctus quoque Ambrosius partem aliquam
Eusebius and St Jerome inform us that St Hippolytus wrote a commentary on the Hexaemeron, or a treatise on the six days of the creation of the world. The illustrious Le Moyne maintains that this work is the first among those which are designated on the Greek tablet dug up from the earth with the statue of our saint, and containing the titles of several other writings of his; and he suspects that the last syllables of the words ΙΟΥϹ and ΝΙΑϹ, out of which Scaliger and Boucher make ΨΑΛΜΟΥϹ ΜΕΤΑΝΟΙΑϹ, Penitential Psalms, are the remnants of the words εἰς πρωτοπλάστους, and περὶ κοσμογονίας, or ζωογονίας, which designate the treatises of Hippolytus On the Things after the Hexaemeron, and On the Hexaemeron. According to this interpretation of Le Moyne, therefore, St Hippolytus would have written commentaries on the first and second chapters of Genesis, or on the Hexaemeron, both on the things which God had created in the six days, and on the things which properly regarded man and his placement in paradise; or, to say it in a few words, according to Le Moyne he would have written a commentary on the state of our first parents, on the creation of the world, and on living things. Yet although this opinion is more ingenious and more natural than that of Scaliger concerning the Penitential Psalms, it must nevertheless be confessed that neither is more certain. For both depend solely on imagination; and thus indeed a third person, who might wish to indulge his own ingenuity here, could dig out still another meaning, which perhaps would come closer to the truth. And assuredly the conjectures of the learned men Thomas Gale and Edward Bernard, who from the remnants of the letters ΙΟΥϹ divine Ἰουδαίους, so that the entire sense is Ἀπόδειξις πρὸς τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, or κατὰ τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, Demonstration against the Jews, do not displease many learned men. However these things may be, this is nevertheless true, that St Hippolytus composed a Hexaemeron. St John Damascene in his Parallels has preserved for us a certain fragment of this writing, which comprises a refutation of those who placed the earthly paradise in heaven, and thence denied that the same was of the number of the creatures of this universe. Nay more, St Ambrose also has preserved for us some part
Editors' notes and page, col. 316
Footnotes
(18) ‹anchor: tamen neutram› · call in col 316
Ea le Moynii conjectura cl. Basnagio etiam non arridet. Quippe vero proximum est, germanos operum Hippolyti titulos statuae marmoreae inscriptos fuisse. Hos vero suis Hippolytum operibus indidisse, quos adduxit le Moynius, non liquet, neque etiam fit credibile. Basnage, Annal. ad annum 222, pag. 289.
That conjecture of Le Moyne does not please the distinguished Basnage either. For it is very near the truth that the genuine titles of Hippolytus's works were inscribed on the marble statue. But that Hippolytus gave his works the titles Le Moyne adduced is not clear, nor is it even credible. Basnage, Annales, at the year 222, p. 289.
(printed under page 168)
(19) ‹anchor: pluribus non displicent› · call in col 316
ΝΙΑC. Eduardus Bernardus legit περὶ κοσμογονίας, ut intelligatur quod veteres inter Hippolyti scripta laudant comment. in Hexaemeron; aut vero περὶ κόσμου συντελείας. Thomas Galeus legit περὶ ἡγεμονίας, De regimine.
ΝΙΑC. Edward Bernard reads On the creation of the world, so that it may be understood as the commentary on the Hexaemeron which the ancients praise among Hippolytus's writings; or else On the consummation of the world. Thomas Gale reads On sovereignty, De regimine.
(printed under page 168)
(20) ‹anchor: creaturarum hujus universi› · call in col 316
Joan. Damasc. tom. II, pag. 787 noviss. editionis.
John of Damascus, vol. II, p. 787 of the latest edition.
(printed under page 168)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 316
- marginal letters: A IV Nonas Aprilis,; B designent Hippolyti; C aliud posset eruere,; D Quinimo sanctus
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek title fragments); editors' matter: IV Nonas Aprilis (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); spanning heading CAPUT III. DE FRAGMENTIS OPERUM S. HIPPOLYTI ET DE DEPERDITIS. set in col. 315; this part opens with col 315's text below the band (Eusebius ... quae, with col 315's calls 15-17), set here in reading order before col 316's lower text (designent ...); word split at end of column: ali-[quam]
- other: the word aliquam was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 317
hujus tractatus in Hexaemeron nobis conservavit, seu, ut notat D. Hieronymus, Hippolyti et Basilii vestigiis institit Ambrosius, in iis quae de eodem argumento scripsit.
of this treatise on the Hexaemeron, or, as St Jerome notes, Ambrose trod in the footsteps of Hippolytus and Basil in the things which he wrote on the same subject.
Praeter opus praecedens, eodem D. Hieronymo teste, discimus S. Hippolytum nostrum etiam commentarium scripsisse in Genesin. Eusebius quidem hujus operis non meminit; verum sancto Hieronymo rectissime hoc credi potest, qui affirmat quod, sicut alia quae recenset illius auctoris opera, hoc etiam legerit. Praeterea admodum verisimile est Eusebium comprehendisse hunc commentarium in eo, quem S. Hippolytus, quemadmodum ipsemet dicit Eusebius, scripserat in ea, quae post sex dies consecuta sunt, id est, ut vulgo intelligitur, in reliqua Geneseos capita. Cl. Valesius tamen nihilominus et Scaliger ante eum hunc Eusebii locum de secundo duntaxat Geneseos capite interpretantur.
Besides the preceding work, with the same St Jerome as witness, we learn that our St Hippolytus also wrote a commentary on Genesis. Eusebius indeed does not make mention of this work; yet St Jerome may most rightly be believed as to this, who affirms that, just like the other works of that author which he reviews, he had read this one also. Besides, it is very probable that Eusebius included this commentary in that which St Hippolytus, just as Eusebius himself says, had written on the things which followed after the six days, that is, as is commonly understood, on the remaining chapters of Genesis. The illustrious Valesius nevertheless, and Scaliger before him, interpret this passage of Eusebius of the second chapter of Genesis alone.
At vero nullus est ambigendi locus, quin is commentarius, de quo hic quaeritur, in totam Genesim se extendat, postquam Albertus Fabricius plura hujus commentarii fragmenta Graece ac Latine evulgavit. Sic ibi observamus explicationes in I, III caput, et omnes fere versiculos capit. XLIX Geneseos. Accedit quod S. Hieronymus, dum conabatur explanationem dare de Melchisedecho, diserte dicat se consuluisse sanctum Hippolytum; proinde videtur per hoc testificari quod sanctus noster in caput XIV, in quo de Melchisedech sermo fit, commentatus fuerit. Idem doctor maximus allegat adhuc fragmentum satis longum de Isaac et Rebecca, id est, super caput XXVII Geneseos ex eodem commentario. Isidorus etiam Hispalensis eamdem explicationem allegoricam de Isaac et Rebecca ex S. Hippolyto refert. Apud Leontium quoque Byzantinum habetur exiguum fragmentum commentarii S. Hippolyti in benedictiones Abrahae. Super versum 27 capitis XLIX Geneseos, quo continentur benedictiones Abrahae pro filiis suis, sanctus Hippolytus sancto apostolo Paulo illud de lupo rapace, quod Benjaminum spectat, accommodat; quam accommodationem postea etiam adhibuerunt S. Augustinus et alii Ecclesiae Patres.
Yet there is no room for doubting that that commentary which is here in question extends over the whole of Genesis, now that Albert Fabricius has published several fragments of this commentary in Greek and Latin. Thus we observe there explanations on the 1st and 3rd chapters, and almost all the verses of chap. 49 of Genesis. Added to this is the fact that St Jerome, while he was endeavouring to give an explanation concerning Melchizedek, expressly says that he consulted St Hippolytus; accordingly he seems by this to testify that our saint commented on chap. 14, in which mention is made of Melchizedek. The same greatest doctor adduces further a fairly long fragment concerning Isaac and Rebecca, that is, upon chap. 27 of Genesis from the same commentary. Isidore of Seville also reports the same allegorical explanation concerning Isaac and Rebecca from St Hippolytus. In Leontius of Byzantium also there is found a small fragment of the commentary of St Hippolytus on the blessings of Abraham. Upon verse 27 of chap. 49 of Genesis, in which are contained the blessings of Abraham for his sons, St Hippolytus applies to the holy Apostle Paul that saying concerning the ravening wolf which regards Benjamin; which application St Augustine and other Fathers of the Church also employed afterwards.
Editors' notes and page, col. 317
Footnotes
(21) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 317
« Nuper S. Ambrosius sic Hexaemeron illius (Origenis) compilavit, ut magis Hippolyti sententias Basiliique sequeretur. » Hieronym., ep. 41 ad Pammach. et Ocean.
"Recently St Ambrose so compiled the Hexaemeron of that man (Origen) that he followed rather the opinions of Hippolytus and Basil." Jerome, letter 41 to Pammachius and Oceanus.
(printed under page 169)
(22) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 317
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 169)
(23) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 317
Henric. Vales. in cap. 22 lib. VI H. E. Eusebii.
Henri de Valois, on ch. 22 of book VI of Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History.
(printed under page 169)
(24) ‹anchor: Latine evulgavit› · call in col 317
Fabric., Opp. Hippolyt. tom. II, pag. 22.
Fabricius, Works of Hippolytus, vol. II, p. 22.
(printed under page 169)
(25) ‹anchor: consuluisse sanctum Hippolytum› · call in col 317
« Verti me ad Hippolytum, Irenaeum, » etc. Hieron. ad Evangelum presbyterum, ep. 73 noviss. edit. Venet. in-4°, alias 126, epist. crit. p. 570 apud Benedictin.
"I turned to Hippolytus, Irenaeus," etc. Jerome to Evangelus the presbyter, letter 73 of the latest Venice edition in quarto, otherwise 126, critical letter, p. 570 in the Benedictines.
(printed under page 169)
(26) ‹anchor: eodem commentario› · call in col 317
Hieronym., epist. ad Damasum 36 noviss. edit., alias 125, p. 569 apud Benedictinos.
Jerome, letter to Damasus, 36 of the latest edition, otherwise 125, p. 569 in the Benedictines.
(printed under page 169)
(27) ‹anchor: Isidorus etiam Hispalensis› · call in col 317
Isidor. Hispal. in cap. XXIII Genes.
Isidore of Seville, on ch. XXIII of Genesis.
(printed under page 169)
(28) ‹anchor: benedictiones Abrahae› · call in col 317
Leont. Byzant., lib. I contra Nestorium et Eutychem, tom. IX Biblioth. PP. Lugdun. p. 682; in versione Latina hujus loci Leontii Byzantini legitur Balaam hoc modo: « Sancti Hippolyti et episcopi et martyris ex Benedictionibus Balaam. » Videtur hoc error esse librariorum, atque legendum esse Abraam, conformiter textui Graeco: Ἐκ τῶν εὐλογιῶν τοῦ Ἀβραάμ. Tom. II Opp. Hippolyt. pag. 45.
Leontius of Byzantium, book I Against Nestorius and Eutyches, vol. IX of the Lyons Bibliotheca Patrum, p. 682; in the Latin version of this passage of Leontius of Byzantium Balaam is read thus: "Of St Hippolytus, both bishop and martyr, from the Blessings of Balaam." This seems to be a copyists' error, and Abraam should be read, in agreement with the Greek text: From the Blessings of Abraham. Vol. II of the Works of Hippolytus, p. 45.
(printed under page 169)
Page
- running head: 317 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A quam hujus tractatus; B ligitur, in reliqua; C commentatus fuerit.
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: quam hujus tractatus (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [ali]quam
Caeterum observandum quod S. Hippolytus suo in Genesin commentario fere omnia allegorice interpretetur. Verum non ita tamen animum ad inveniendum in figuris Veteris Testamenti Novi Foederis veritates intendit, ut non aliquando etiam sensum litteralem illustrare studeat. In pluribus locis Scripturarum versiones ab Aquila et Symmacho adornatas adhibuit. Fabricius haec fragmenta Commentarii in Genesin, quae edidit, ex collectione 88 Patrum in Genesin eruit, quae collectio asservatur in manuscripto in bibliotheca imperatoris Vindobonae in Austria.
Moreover, it is to be observed that St Hippolytus in his commentary on Genesis interprets almost all things allegorically. Yet he does not so bend his mind to finding the truths of the New Covenant in the figures of the Old Testament as not sometimes to study also to illustrate the literal sense. In several passages he employed the versions of the Scriptures prepared by Aquila and Symmachus. Fabricius dug out these fragments of the Commentary on Genesis which he published from a collection of 88 Fathers on Genesis, which collection is preserved in manuscript in the library of the Emperor at Vienna in Austria.
§ II. Commentarius S. Hippolyti in Exodum.
§ II. The Commentary of St Hippolytus on Exodus.
Sanctus Hieronymus adhuc attribuit S. Hippolyto Commentarium in Exodum, quem Eusebius forte generatim designavit, dum affirmavit, uti paulo antea diximus, sanctum nostrum in ea etiam commentatum fuisse quae post sex dies consequuntur in libris Moysis. Vidit hunc commentarium S. Hieronymus; atque propterea dubitare non possumus de illius olim exsistentia. Cl. quidem le Moynius in dubium revocare hoc videtur, dum absque fundamento obtendit sanctum Hieronymum non nisi ex male intellectis Eusebii verbis commentarium in Exodum astruxisse. Hic enim (Eusebius), subjungit le Moynius, postquam designavit Hexaemeron, dicit, quod S. Hippolytus scripserit etiam in ea quae sequuntur sex dies, εἰς τὰ μετὰ τὴν ἑξαήμερον: per quae verba, pergit le Moynius, hic notantur protoplastorum status, habitatio, tentatio, lapsus, et varia quae Adamum, Evam, paradisum, serpentem, arbores vitae et scientiae, et alia his adjuncta spectare videntur. At vero eruditus hic auctor non satis animum attendit quod sanctus Hieronymus non secundum Eusebium loquatur, sed evolutis ipsis, quos nominat, libris: E quibus, inquit, hos reperi, in ἑξαήμερον, et in Exodum. Hoc per se manifestum, et nullam difficultatem patitur. Caeterum nihil amplius de Commentario S. Hippolyti in Exodum hodie habemus. Saepe quidem allegatur in commentario Arabico in Pentateuchum operum collectioni divi Hippolyti inserto. Sed verisimile omnino est, quod auctor hujus commentarii nomen S. Hippolyti, S.
St Jerome further attributes to St Hippolytus a Commentary on Exodus, which Eusebius perhaps designated generally when he affirmed, as we said a little before, that our saint commented also on the things which follow after the six days in the books of Moses. St Jerome saw this commentary; and on that account we cannot doubt of its former existence. The illustrious Le Moyne indeed seems to call this into doubt, while without foundation he alleges that St Jerome established a commentary on Exodus only from misunderstood words of Eusebius. For the latter (Eusebius), subjoins Le Moyne, after he has designated the Hexaemeron, says that St Hippolytus wrote also on the things which follow the six days, εἰς τὰ μετὰ τὴν ἑξαήμερον: by which words, continues Le Moyne, there are noted here the state of our first parents, their habitation, temptation, fall, and the various things which seem to regard Adam, Eve, paradise, the serpent, the trees of life and of knowledge, and other things joined to these. Yet this learned author does not sufficiently attend to the fact that St Jerome speaks not according to Eusebius, but after having unrolled the very books which he names: Of which, he says, I have found these: On the Hexaemeron, and On Exodus. This is manifest of itself, and admits no difficulty. For the rest, we have nothing more today of the Commentary of St Hippolytus on Exodus. It is indeed often cited in the Arabic commentary on the Pentateuch inserted into the collection of the works of St Hippolytus. But it is altogether probable that the author of this commentary borrowed the name of St Hippolytus, St
Editors' notes and page, col. 318
Footnotes
(29) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 318
Hippolyt. Opp. tom. II, pag. 22, 23, 26.
Works of Hippolytus, vol. II, pp. 22, 23, 26.
(printed under page 169)
(30) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 318
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 169)
(31) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 318
Euseb., H. E. lib. VI, cap. 22.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 22.
(printed under page 169)
(32) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 318
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, tom. II, pag. 990.
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, vol. II, p. 990.
(printed under page 169)
(33) ‹anchor: E quibus, inquit› · call in col 318
Hieronym. loc. cit.
Jerome, at the place cited.
(printed under page 169)
(34) ‹anchor: in Pentateuchum› · call in col 318
Auctor hujus commentarii Arabs sub nomine sancti Hippolyti allegat quadraginta loca, eumque ordinario Expositorem Targhumistam vocat. Vid. Opp. S. Hippolyt. apud Fabric. tom. II, pag. 37 et seq.
The Arab author of this commentary cites forty passages under the name of St Hippolytus, and regularly calls him the Targumist Expositor. See the Works of St Hippolytus in Fabricius, vol. II, p. 37 ff.
(printed under page 169)
(35) ‹anchor: Hippolyti inserto› · call in col 318
Fabric., l. c.
Fabricius, at the place cited.
(printed under page 169)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 318
- marginal letters: A Caeterum observandum; B forte generatim; C tio, tentatio,; D gitur Balaam
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek title phrases); editors' matter: Caeterum observandum (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); § II. Commentarius S. Hippolyti in Exodum.
Basilii, Epiphanii et aliorum Patrum, quos hic citat, ideo duntaxat mutuatus fuerit, ut operi suo aliquam dignitatem, quam in se non habebat, conciliaret.
Basil, Epiphanius, and of the other Fathers whom he cites here, only to the end that he might win for his own work some dignity which it did not have in itself.
Nec desunt argumenta pro ascribendo sancto Hippolyto aliquod opusculum seu commentarium in quaedam primi Regum libri loca, in quibus sermo habetur de Helcana patre et anna Matre Samuelis. Theodoretus suis in Dialogis quaedam hujus scripti loca nobis conservavit quae a Fabricio in editione operum nostri Sancti referuntur.
Nor are arguments wanting for ascribing to St Hippolytus some little work or commentary on certain passages of the first book of Kings, in which discourse is held concerning Elkanah the father and Hannah the mother of Samuel. Theodoret in his Dialogues has preserved for us certain passages of this writing, which are reported by Fabricius in the edition of the works of our Saint.
§ III. Commentarius S. Hippolyti in Saulem et Pythonissam.
§ III. The Commentary of St Hippolytus on Saul and the Pythoness.
Idem S. Hippolytus composuit aliud etiam opusculum in alia hujus S. Scripturae libri loca, quae respiciunt Saulem et Pythonissam. Observatum est autem a viris doctis Hippolytum raro suscepisse integrum librum Scripturae interpretandum, sed selectum argumentum, quemadmodum ex jam supra dictis, atque adhuc dicendis, invicte confirmatur. Commentarius de Saule ac Pythonissa notatur ab Hieronymo inter alia sancti nostri doctoris opera.
The same St Hippolytus composed also another little work on other passages of this book of sacred Scripture, which regard Saul and the Pythoness. Now it has been observed by learned men that Hippolytus rarely undertook to interpret an entire book of Scripture, but a select subject, just as is invincibly confirmed by the things already said above and still to be said. The commentary on Saul and the Pythoness is noted by Jerome among the other works of our holy doctor.
Conveniunt etiam viri docti, quod praefatus Hippolyti commentarius in tabula Graeca per vocabulum hoc ΙΤΑϹ ΤΡΙΜΥΘΟΝ designetur, ex quo componere volunt ΕΓΓΑϹΤΡΙΜΥΘΟΝ, quod nomen Septuaginta Interpretes Pythonissae in Endor indiderunt, quae a Saule interrogata, artibus et praestigiis suis, Samuelis umbram excitavit. Extra omnem dubitationis aleam positum nobis videtur, tractatum S. Hippolyti spectasse potius hanc Pythonissam, quam illam, de qua Actorum cap. XVI mentio habetur; licet Scaliger putarit hanc intelligendam esse.
Learned men also agree that the aforesaid commentary of Hippolytus is designated on the Greek tablet by this word ΙΤΑϹ ΤΡΙΜΥΘΟΝ, out of which they wish to put together ΕΓΓΑϹΤΡΙΜΥΘΟΝ, which name the Septuagint Translators gave to the Pythoness at Endor, who when questioned by Saul called up by her arts and juggleries the shade of Samuel. It seems to us placed beyond all hazard of doubt that the treatise of St Hippolytus regarded this Pythoness rather than that one of whom mention is made in Acts chap. 16; although Scaliger thought that the latter was to be understood.
§ IV. Commentarius in Psalmos.
§ IV. The Commentary on the Psalms.
S. Hieronymus, catalogum operum S. Hippolyti prosequens, recenset etiam Commentarium in Psalmos. Asserit cl. le Moynius Eusebium quoque hunc commentarium S. Hippolyto ascripsisse. Sed de hoc sive Eusebiano textu, sive in illius versione nulla vola habetur. Id vero extra controversiam, quod in tabula Graeca hae syllabae ΑΛΜΟΥΣ,
St Jerome, pursuing the catalogue of the works of St Hippolytus, lists also a Commentary on the Psalms. The illustrious Le Moyne asserts that Eusebius also ascribed this commentary to St Hippolytus. But of this neither in the Eusebian text nor in its version is there any trace found. This however is beyond controversy, that on the Greek tablet these syllables ΑΛΜΟΥΣ
Editors' notes and page, col. 319
Footnotes
(36) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 319
Tillemont, Mémoires, tom III, pag. 108.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, p. 108.
(printed under page 170)
(37) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 319
Fabric., tom. I Opp. Hippol., p. 267.
Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of Hippolytus, p. 267.
(printed under page 170)
(38) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 319
Scaliger., Observat. in Canonem Paschalem, apud Fabric., tom. I Opp. Hippol., pag. 81; Maurini, Hist. littéraire de la France, tom. I, pag. 374.
Scaliger, Observations on the Paschal Canon, in Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of Hippolytus, p. 81; the Maurists, Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, p. 374.
(printed under page 170)
(39) ‹anchor: ab Hieronymo› · call in col 319
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61, qui refert Hippolytum scripsisse περὶ Σαοὺλ καὶ Πύθωνος, de Saule et Pythonissa.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61, who reports that Hippolytus wrote On Saul and the Python [Greek], on Saul and the Pythoness.
(printed under page 170)
(40) ‹anchor: Commentarium in Psalmos› · call in col 319
Hieronym., l. c.
Jerome, at the place cited.
(printed under page 170)
(41) ‹anchor: nulla vola habetur› · call in col 319
Eusebius, notante cl. Ceillierio Hist. génér. des auteurs, tom. II, pag. 322, not. e, exiguam operum S. Hippolyti partem recenset, addendo tamen notanter haec verba: « Sed et alia plurima apud alios asservata licet reperire. » Euseb., H. E. lib. V, cap. 22.
Eusebius, as the distinguished Ceillier notes (Histoire générale des auteurs, vol. II, p. 322, note e), lists a small part of St Hippolytus's works, yet adds these words pointedly: "But many others too may be found preserved among various people." Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book V [sic], ch. 22.
(printed under page 170)
Page
- running head: 319 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A Basilii, Epiphanii; B sculum in alia; C giis suis, Samuelis; D siam, quod in
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek tablet inscriptions); editors' matter: Basilii, Epiphanii (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); § III.; § IV.
ultimae syllabae sint vocis ΨΑΛΜΟΥϹ, atque proinde originarius titulus fuerit εἰς τοὺς Ψαλμούς. Ex loquendi modo D. Hieronymi verisimile videtur, quod ille intellexerit commentarium in integrum Psalterium; ait enim: Hippolytus . . . scripsit nonnullos in Scripturas commentarios, e quibus hos reperi: in Hexaemeron . . . de Psalmis. Quapropter Scaliger et le Moynius nullatenus dubitant, quin S. Hippolytus noster in enarrandis Psalmis operam suam collocarit. Addit praeterea le Moynius id certo certius colligi posse ex Catena in Psalmos, quae codice Ms. asservatur in bibliotheca Medicea Florentiae. Theodoretus bina fragmenta exinde etiam exhibet, primum ex Commentariis in psalmum II, secundum ex Commentariis in psalmum XXIII, seu XXIV. Teste Alberto Fabricio etiam Hippolyti expositio psalmi IX habetur inter mss. bibliothecae Bodleianae. Operis hujus hypothesin sive praefationem mss. se habere testatus est Thomas Galeus. Habuit et Alexander Morus, qui laudat notis ad Novum Foedus, ad Hebraeos X, 5. Stephanus le Moyne et Alexander Morus hoc Hippolyti argumentum enarrationi in Psalmos praemissum primi produxerunt, sed minus integrum, minusque emendatum, Fabricius autem et Gallandius e mss. cl. viri Thomae Galei emendatius dederunt. Judice perdocto Ceillierio, Demonstratio contra Judaeos a Turriano Latine et abs Fabricio Graece edita, consectarium esse videtur Commentarii S. Hippolyti in Psalmos; nam proprie loquendo illa demonstratio non est, nisi paraphrasis psalmi sexagesimi octavi. Neque hic aliquod observatur judicium operis cujusdam data opera confecti. Sed ex occasione, qua auctor veritatem religionis Christianae adversus Judaeos probat, ad verba hujus psalmi Judaeis exponenda naturaliter trahebatur; atque propterea juxta omnem verisimilitudinem quidam copistae huic fragmento ascripserunt titulum De demonstratione adversus Judaeos. « Quidam nihilominus viri docti persuasionem habentes, pergit Ceillierius, quod S. Hippolytus tractatum integrum adversus Judaeos elaborarit, eumdem designatum credebant in tabula operum lapidea hisce quatuor Graecis litteris ΙΟΥϹ, quas ultimas esse vocabuli Ἰουδαίους existimant,
are the last syllables of the word ΨΑΛΜΟΥϹ, and accordingly the original title was εἰς τοὺς Ψαλμούς, On the Psalms. From the manner of speaking of St Jerome it seems probable that he understood a commentary on the entire Psalter; for he says: Hippolytus... wrote several commentaries on the Scriptures, among which I have found these: On the Hexaemeron... On the Psalms. Wherefore Scaliger and Le Moyne by no means doubt that our St Hippolytus bestowed his labour on expounding the Psalms. Le Moyne adds besides that this can be gathered more surely than sure from the Catena on the Psalms which is preserved in a manuscript codex in the Medicean Library at Florence. Theodoret also exhibits two fragments from it, the first from the Commentaries on Psalm 2, the second from the Commentaries on Psalm 23, or 24. As Albert Fabricius testifies, an exposition of Psalm 9 by Hippolytus is also found among the manuscripts of the Bodleian Library. Thomas Gale testified that he had in manuscript the hypothesis or preface of this work. Alexander More also had it, who cites it in his notes on the New Covenant, on Hebrews 10:5. Stephen Le Moyne and Alexander More first produced this argument of Hippolytus prefixed to the exposition of the Psalms, but less complete and less correct, whereas Fabricius and Gallandi gave it more correctly from the manuscript of the illustrious man Thomas Gale. In the judgement of the very learned Ceillier, the Demonstration against the Jews published in Latin by Turrianus and in Greek by Fabricius seems to be an extract from the Commentary of St Hippolytus on the Psalms; for properly speaking that demonstration is nothing but a paraphrase of the sixty-eighth Psalm. Nor is there observed here any mark of a work composed on purpose. But from the occasion on which the author proves the truth of the Christian religion against the Jews, he was naturally drawn to expound the words of this psalm to the Jews; and on that account according to all probability certain copyists ascribed to this fragment the title On the Demonstration against the Jews. "Certain learned men nevertheless holding the persuasion," continues Ceillier, "that St Hippolytus composed an entire treatise against the Jews, believed that the same was designated on the stone tablet of his works by these four Greek letters ΙΟΥϹ, which they considered to be the last letters of the word Ἰουδαίους,
Editors' notes and page, col. 320
Footnotes
(42) ‹anchor: de Psalmis› · call in col 320
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 170)
(43) ‹anchor: le Moynius› · call in col 320
Le Moyne, Var. sac., tom. II, pag. 992.
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, vol. II, p. 992.
(printed under page 170)
(44) ‹anchor: exinde etiam exhibet› · call in col 320
Theodoret. dialog. 1 et 2, pag. 89; Hippolyt. tom. I Opp. apud Fabric., pag. 268. Fabricius etiam, pag. 269, allegat ex Theodoreto commentarium in psalmum CXVIII, juxta nos, et CXIX, juxta Hebraeos; sed ut censent Maurini nostri Hist. littér. de la France, tom. I, pag. 374, not. 1, ex male intellectis hujus Patris verbis, quae non hunc Psalmum, sed Canticum canticorum innuunt. Vid. Henric. Vales., not. c. in Euseb. H. E. lib. VI, cap. 22, pag. 249.
Theodoret, dialogues 1 and 2, p. 89; Hippolytus, vol. I of the Works, in Fabricius, p. 268. Fabricius also, p. 269, cites from Theodoret a commentary on Psalm 118 by our numbering, 119 by the Hebrew; but, as our Maurists judge (Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, p. 374, note 1), from a misunderstanding of this Father's words, which point not to this Psalm but to the Song of Songs. See Henri de Valois, note c on Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 22, p. 249.
(printed under page 170)
(45) ‹anchor: Alberto Fabricio› · call in col 320
Alb. Fabric., Biblioth. Graec., tom. cit., pag. 209.
Albert Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca, the volume cited, p. 209.
(printed under page 170)
(46) ‹anchor: minusque emendatum› · call in col 320
Le Moyne, Var. sac., tom. II, pag. 977.
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, vol. II, p. 977.
(printed under page 170)
(47) ‹anchor: emendatius dederunt› · call in col 320
Fabric., tom. I Opp. Hippolyt., pag. 267; Galland., Biblioth. PP. tom. II, pag. 486.
Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of Hippolytus, p. 267; Gallandi, Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. II, p. 486.
(printed under page 170)
(48) ‹anchor: perdocto Ceillierio› · call in col 320
Remi Ceillier, tom. II Hist. génér. des auteurs, pag. 322.
Remi Ceillier, Histoire générale des auteurs, vol. II, p. 322.
(printed under page 170)
(49) ‹anchor: abs Fabricio› · call in col 320
Fabric., Opp. S. Hippolyt. tom. II, pag. 2 et seq.
Fabricius, Works of St Hippolytus, vol. II, p. 2 ff.
(printed under page 170)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 320
- marginal letters: A ultimae syllabae; B in psalmum XXIII,; C esse videtur; D ΙΟΥϹ, quas ultimas
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek tablet inscriptions); editors' matter: ultimae syllabae (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: existi-[mant]
- other: the word existimant, was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 321
ut adeo inde laudata in tabula legendum sit Ἀπόδειξις πρὸς τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, seu κατὰ τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, Demonstratio adversus Judaeos. Verum haec conjectura omni fundamento destituitur. Atque satius propterea est ingenue fateri ignorantiam quoad relationem quatuor harum litterarum, quam in re adeo obscura divinari velle. » Hactenus cl. Remigius Ceillierius.
so that accordingly on the aforesaid tablet one should read from this Ἀπόδειξις πρὸς τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, or κατὰ τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, Demonstration against the Jews. Yet this conjecture is destitute of all foundation. And on that account it is better frankly to confess ignorance as regards the reference of these four letters than to wish to play the diviner in a matter so obscure." Thus far the illustrious Remi Ceillier.
§ V. Commentarius in VII Psalmos poenitentiales non est S. Hippolyti.
§ V. The Commentary on the Seven Penitential Psalms is not of St Hippolytus.
Praeter hunc Commentarium in omnes Psalmos, doctissimus Josephus Scaliger eidem sancto nostro Hippolyto sigillatim ascribit insuper Commentarium in septem Psalmos poenitentiales. Verum quoniam doctissimus vir duntaxat nititur interpretationi longius accersitae duarum syllabarum vocabulorum ΙΟΥϹ et ΝΙΑϹ in tabula Graeca, illius opinione stare non possumus. Cum et ipse Scaliger bene agnoverit lectionem suam μετανοίας, poenitentiae, admodum coactam esse, nullo modo autem vulgarem; hinc etiam insimulat sculptorem, et de commisso errore arguit, quando posuit ΝΙΑϹ pro ΝΟΙΑϹ. Accedit quod nulla omnino adsit verisimilitudo, quemadmodum sapienter animadvertit cl. le Moynius quod, cum tabula Graeca satis perspicue linea tertia in Psalmos designet, linea prima aliud opus in Psalmos eadem tabula indicet. Nam postea additur (verba sunt cl. le Moynii), quod S. Hippolytus scripserit in Psalmos; quod satis innuit, ΙΟΥϹ ΝΙΑϹ non esse reliquias vocum ψαλμοὺς μετανοίας. Secus bis, in brevi laterculo, observaretur Hippolytum scripsisse in Psalmos; primo in Psalmos poenitentiales, deinde in omnes Psalmos; quod a nullo veterum, qui de Hippolyto mentionem fecerunt, fuit unquam observatum. Sed quod omnino evertit conjecturam Scaligeri, est, quod tempore S. Hippolyti nulla adhuc erat mentio Psalmorum poenitentialium. Adeo ut non potuerit peculiarem parare commentarium in Psalmos istos peculiares, qui hodie poenitentiales vocantur, et apud veteres nulla prorsus ψαλμῶν τῆς μετανοίας memoria. Haec cl. le Moyne.
Besides this Commentary on all the Psalms, the most learned Joseph Scaliger specifically ascribes in addition to the same St Hippolytus of ours a Commentary on the Seven Penitential Psalms. Yet since the most learned man relies solely upon a rather far-fetched interpretation of the two syllables of the words ΙΟΥϹ and ΝΙΑϹ on the Greek tablet, we cannot abide by his opinion. Since even Scaliger himself well recognized that his reading μετανοίας, of repentance, was very forced, and by no means ordinary; hence he also blames the sculptor, and charges him with an error committed when he put ΝΙΑϹ for ΝΟΙΑϹ. Added to this is the fact that there is no probability at all, just as the illustrious Le Moyne wisely observes, that when the Greek tablet fairly clearly designates On the Psalms in the third line, the same tablet should indicate another work On the Psalms in the first line. For afterwards there is added (the words are those of the illustrious Le Moyne) that St Hippolytus wrote On the Psalms; which sufficiently intimates that ΙΟΥϹ ΝΙΑϹ are not remnants of the words ψαλμοὺς μετανοίας. Otherwise twice in a brief list Hippolytus would be observed to have written on the Psalms: first on the Penitential Psalms, then on all the Psalms; which was never observed by any of the ancients who made mention of Hippolytus. But what altogether overthrows the conjecture of Scaliger is that in the time of St Hippolytus there was as yet no mention of Penitential Psalms. So that he could not have prepared a special commentary on those special Psalms which today are called penitential, and among the ancients there is no memory at all of ψαλμῶν τῆς μετανοίας, Psalms of Repentance. Thus the illustrious Le Moyne.
§ VI. Commentarius S. Hippolyti in Cantica.
§ VI. The Commentary of St Hippolytus on the Canticles.
Eusebius et Hieronymus inter opera S. Hippolyti adhuc recensent Commentarium in Cantica canticorum, quem Theodoretus etiam allegat in dialogo qui Eranistes inscribitur. Hic commentarius saeculo VII adhucdum habebatur; siquidem Anastasius Sinaita illum legerat. Idem Anastasius
Eusebius and Jerome among the works of St Hippolytus further list a Commentary on the Song of Songs, which Theodoret also cites in the dialogue which is entitled Eranistes. This commentary was still extant in the 7th century, since Anastasius of Sinai had read it. The same Anastasius
Editors' notes and page, col. 321
Footnotes
(50) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 321
Scalig., lib. VII De emendat. tempor., et apud Fabric. inter Hippolyt. opp. tom. I, pag. 79 et 80.
Scaliger, book VII De emendatione temporum, and in Fabricius among the works of Hippolytus, vol. I, pp. 79 and 80.
(printed under page 171)
(51) ‹anchor: cl. le Moynius› · call in col 321
Le Moyne, Var. sacr., tom. II, pag. 970.
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, vol. II, p. 970.
(printed under page 171)
(52) ‹anchor: Psalmorum poenitentialium› · call in col 321
Possidius in Vita S. Augustini, cap. 31, mentionem facit Psalmorum poenitentialium, et fortasse hoc primum et antiquissimum eorumdem vestigium est, quod sane ultra saeculum V non ascendit.
Possidius, in the Life of St Augustine, ch. 31, mentions the penitential Psalms, and this is perhaps the first and most ancient trace of them, which certainly goes back no further than the fifth century.
(printed under page 171)
(53) ‹anchor: adhuc recensent› · call in col 321
Εἰς τὸ ᾆσμα. Euseb., H. E. lib. VI, cap. 22; S. Hieron. in Catalog. p. 61.
On the Song. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 22; St Jerome, in the Catalogue, p. [sic] 61.
(printed under page 171)
(54) ‹anchor: Theodoretus› · call in col 321
Theodoret. dialog. 2, hunc librum Hippolyti ita citat: Εἰς τὴν ᾠδὴν τὴν μεγάλην, pag. 88.
Theodoret, dialogue 2, cites this book of Hippolytus thus: On the great Song, p. 88.
(printed under page 171)
(55) ‹anchor: Anastasius Sinaita› · call in col 321
Anastas. Sinaita, quaest. 41, pag. 554.
Anastasius of Sinai, question 41, p. 554.
(printed under page 171)
Page
- running head: 321 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A mant, ut adeo; B bulorum ΙΟΥϹ; C ψαλμοὺς μετανοίας.; D canticorum, quem
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek title phrases); editors' matter: mant, ut adeo (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); § V.; § VI.; word split at start of column: [existi]mant; word split at end of column: Anasta-[sius]
locum satis considerabilem ex eo nobis conservavit; quem Graece ac Latine Fabricius et Gallandius inter S. Hippolyti opera referunt. Hoc fragmento S. Pater librum Sapientiae a Salomone perscriptum agnoscit, quemadmodum Proverbia, Ecclesiasten et Cantica canticorum. Ait etiam Salomonem, dicendo Canticum canticorum, significare voluisse se id, quod continebatur ter mille odis seu canticis, hoc uno comprehendisse. Hac quoque occasione dum S. Hippolytus explicare aggreditur, quod Scriptura refert de selectu scriptorum omnium Salomonis ab amicis Ezechiae regis facto, testatur illos sapientes viros ea duntaxat e scriptis Salomonis selegisse, quae ad aedificationem Ecclesiae servirent. Libros vero Salomonis Parabolarum et Canticorum, in quibus scripserat de plantarum et omnis generis animalium natura terrestrium, volatilium, natatilium, et de morbis sanandis, Ezechias abolevit, seu penitus suppressit, quod populus crudus et parum instructus exinde petere posset medelas morborum, eorumque sanationem a Deo petere negligeret. Eadem referunt Suidas in Ἐζεχίας, Syncellus et alii verisimiliter ex sancto nostro Hippolyto deprompta.
has preserved for us a fairly considerable passage from it, which Fabricius and Gallandi report in Greek and Latin among the works of St Hippolytus. In this fragment the holy Father acknowledges the book of Wisdom to have been written by Solomon, just like Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. He says also that Solomon, in saying Song of Songs, wished to signify that he had comprised in this one song that which was contained in three thousand odes or songs. On this occasion also, while St Hippolytus undertakes to explain what Scripture relates concerning the selection of all the writings of Solomon made by the friends of King Hezekiah, he testifies that those wise men selected from the writings of Solomon only those things which would serve for the edification of the Church. But the books of Solomon of Parables and Songs, in which he had written of the nature of plants and of every kind of terrestrial, flying, and swimming animals, and of the healing of diseases, Hezekiah abolished, or wholly suppressed, because the uncultivated and little-instructed people might seek remedies for diseases from them, and neglect to seek their healing from God. Suidas under Ἐζεχίας, Syncellus, and others report the same things, probably drawn from our St Hippolytus.
§ VII. Commentarii S. Hippolyti in Proverbia, Ecclesiasten.
§ VII. The Commentaries of St Hippolytus on Proverbs and Ecclesiastes.
Divus Hieronymus asseverat quoque se vidisse Commentarium sancti nostri in Proverbia Salomonis. Idem confirmat etiam Suidas. Albertus Fabricius ex Catena Graecorum Patrum quinque loca Latina hujus Commentarii editioni Operum D. Hippolyti inseruit, quemadmodum et cl. Gallandius. In his exponitur titulus libri Proverbiorum, et undecimus seu duodecimus versus capitis I. Praeterea notatu adhuc dignius fragmentum hujus Commentarii idem cl. editor Albertus Fabricius subjecit, quod Graece descripsit e codice Taurinensi 82, excerpta varia veterum scriptorum complectente V. C. Matthaeus Pfaffius. In hoc sanctus Hippolytus capitis IX Proverbiorum haec verba versus 1: Sapientia aedificavit sibi domum, egregie illustrat.
St Jerome asserts also that he saw a Commentary of our saint on the Proverbs of Solomon. Suidas also confirms the same. Albert Fabricius from a Catena of the Greek Fathers inserted five Latin passages of this Commentary into his edition of the Works of St Hippolytus, just as the illustrious Gallandi also did. In these there is expounded the title of the book of Proverbs, and the eleventh or twelfth verse of chap. 1. Besides, the same illustrious editor Albert Fabricius subjoined a fragment of this Commentary still more worthy of note, which the illustrious Matthäus Pfaff transcribed in Greek from the Turin codex 82, comprising various excerpts of ancient writers. In this St Hippolytus excellently illustrates these words of chap. 9 of Proverbs, verse 1: Wisdom has built herself a house.
Meminit Hieronymus et ex eo Honorius Commentarii in Ecclesiasten, cujus fragmenta in bibliotheca Bodleiana dicuntur exsistere in Ecclesiastae II, 24, quemadmodum et illud Proverbiorum IX: Sapientia aedificavit sibi domum. Fertur etiam, quod in bibliotheca Vindobonensi augustissimi imperatoris asservetur msc. complectens S. Hippolyti commentarios in libros Salomonis.
Jerome, and from him Honorius, makes mention of a Commentary on Ecclesiastes, fragments of which are said to exist in the Bodleian Library on Ecclesiastes 2:24, just as also that on Proverbs 9: Wisdom has built herself a house. It is reported also that in the Vienna Library of the most august Emperor there is preserved a manuscript comprising the commentaries of St Hippolytus on the books of Solomon.
Editors' notes and page, col. 322
Footnotes
(56) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 322
Idem ibid.
The same, ibid.
(printed under page 171)
(57) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 322
Fabric., tom. I Opp. pag. 270; Galland., Biblioth. PP. tom. II, pag. 489.
Fabricius, vol. I of the Works, p. 270; Gallandi, Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. II, p. 489.
(printed under page 171)
(58) ‹anchor: Salomonis› · call in col 322
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 171)
(59) ‹anchor: etiam Suidas› · call in col 322
Suidas I, pag. 144.
Suidas, I, p. 144.
(printed under page 171)
(60) ‹anchor: cl. Gallandius› · call in col 322
Fabr., tom. I Opp. Hippol., pag. 282; Galland. l. c. pag. 488.
Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of Hippolytus, p. 282; Gallandi, at the place cited, p. 488.
(printed under page 171)
(61) ‹anchor: Fertur etiam› · call in col 322
Canis., B. T. I, pag. 9.
Canisius, B. T. [vol.] I, p. 9.
(printed under page 171)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 322
- marginal letters: A sius locum satis; B larum et Canticorum,; C loca Latina hujus; D quemadmodum et
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek word Ἐζεχίας); editors' matter: sius locum satis (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); § VII.; word split at start of column: [Anasta]sius
§ VIII. Commentarii in Isaiam et Ezechielem.
§ VIII. The Commentaries on Isaiah and Ezekiel.
In Isaiam scripsisse Hippolytus martyr traditur ab Hieronymo et Nicephoro, ut Graecum Hieronymi interpretem et recentiores, qui ejus catalogum exscribunt, Latinos, Honorium, Freculfum, aliosque juniores omittam. Ex hoc in Isaiam sive in selecta Isaiae loca commentario deprompta esse puto, inquit cl. Fabricius, quae de gradibus in horologio Hiskiae, sive Ezechiae ex Hippolyto refert Michael Glycas pag. 194 Annalium. In codice mss. Graeco 193 bibliothecae Coislinianae (quae olim Seguieriana), teste clariss. Montfauconio, p. 245, exstat Hippolyti, qui ibi, ut solemne est Graecis scriptoribus, episcopus Romae appellatur, fragmentum de Ezechia, quod incipit: Ἔτι μακαρισθέντος (mendose excusum pro μαλακισθέντος) τοῦ Ἐζεχίου, aegrotante Ezechia, atque Contra fatum. Albertus Fabricius tomo II Operum S. Hippolyti hoc Graece ac Latine inseruit pag. 81, et Gallandius tomo II Bibliothecae PP., pag. 489. Idem prorsus est cum eo, quod a Glyca refertur. Agitur autem hoc in commentario de miraculosa Ezechiae regis sanatione, et de retrogradatione solis in horologio Achaz relata abs Isaia capite XXXVIII, v. 5. Vocat Isaiam prophetam angelum, docet quod non solum sol, sed luna etiam retrocesserit, in signum proximae regis sanationis; atque quod dies ista fuerit horarum 32. Subjungit adhuc, quod Marodachus Chaldaeus Babyloniorum rex, qui astrologicam artem optime callebat astrorumque cursum accurate dimetiebatur, hoc prodigio primum perculsus, causa postmodum cognita, epistolam et dona ad Ezechiam miserit. Sancti Hippolyti ex sermone in exordium Isaiae quaedam Theodoretus etiam allegat. Scripsisse Hippolytus in Jeremiam a nemine veterum, quod sciam, traditur. Nam quae ejus referuntur in Catena Patrum Graecorum ad Jeremiae cap. XVII, 11, petita sunt ex libro De Antichristo, cap. 55.
Hippolytus the martyr is handed down to have written on Isaiah by Jerome and Nicephorus, to omit the Greek translator of Jerome and the more recent Latins who transcribe his catalogue, Honorius, Freculphus, and other later writers. From this commentary on Isaiah, or on select passages of Isaiah, I think those things are drawn, says the illustrious Fabricius, which Michael Glycas reports from Hippolytus on p. 194 of his Annals concerning the degrees on the sundial of Hiskiah, or Hezekiah. In the Greek manuscript codex 193 of the Coislinian Library (formerly the Séguierian), as the most illustrious Montfaucon testifies on p. 245, there is extant a fragment of Hippolytus, who there, as is customary with Greek writers, is called Bishop of Rome, On Hezekiah, which begins: Ἔτι μακαρισθέντος (erroneously printed for μαλακισθέντος) τοῦ Ἐζεχίου, When Hezekiah was sick, and Against Fate. Albert Fabricius inserted this in Greek and Latin in vol. II of the Works of St Hippolytus, p. 81, and Gallandi in vol. II of the Bibliotheca Patrum, p. 489. It is altogether the same as that which is reported by Glycas. Now this commentary treats of the miraculous healing of King Hezekiah, and of the retrogradation of the sun on the sundial of Ahaz related by Isaiah in chap. 38, v. 5. He calls Isaiah the prophet an angel, teaches that not only the sun, but the moon also went backward, as a sign of the speedy healing of the king; and that that day was of 32 hours. He subjoins further that Merodach the Chaldaean, king of the Babylonians, who was very well skilled in the astronomical art and accurately measured the course of the stars, struck at first by this prodigy, having afterwards learned the cause, sent an epistle and gifts to Hezekiah. Theodoret also cites certain things of St Hippolytus from a discourse on the beginning of Isaiah. That Hippolytus wrote on Jeremiah is handed down by none of the ancients, so far as I know. For the things of his which are reported in the Catena of the Greek Fathers on Jeremiah chap. 17:11 are taken from the book On Antichrist, chap. 55.
Eusebius loquitur de Commentario S. Hippolyti in Ezechielis quaedam capita. Georgius Syncellus refert eamdem rem, sed dissimili aliquantulum ratione. Dicit enim Hippolytum commentatum fuisse in multa prophetarum loca, sed sigillatim in Ezechielem ac Danielem. Mirum quod in Catena Graecorum Patrum in Ezechielem, ex qua excerpta dedit Villalpandus, nulla Hippolyti occurrat mentio. Sed magis adhuc mirandum, quod viri eruditi, qui exstare dicunt in bibliotheca Bodleiana sancti Hippolyti
Eusebius speaks of a Commentary of St Hippolytus on certain chapters of Ezekiel. George Syncellus reports the same thing, but in a somewhat different manner. For he says that Hippolytus commented on many passages of the prophets, and specifically on Ezekiel and Daniel. It is wonderful that in the Catena of the Greek Fathers on Ezekiel, from which Villalpando gave excerpts, no mention of Hippolytus occurs. But it is still more to be wondered at that learned men, who say that there is extant in the Bodleian Library St Hip-
Editors' notes and page, col. 323
Footnotes
(62) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 323
Hieronym. in Catalog. cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 172)
(63) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 323
Nicephor., H. E. lib. IV, c. 31.
Nicephorus, Ecclesiastical History book IV, ch. 31.
(printed under page 172)
(64) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 323
Fabric., tom. I Opp. Hippol., pag. 271.
Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of Hippolytus, p. 271.
(printed under page 172)
(65) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 323
Isa. XXXVIII.
Isaiah 38.
(printed under page 172)
(66) ‹anchor: Theodoretus etiam allegat› · call in col 323
Theodoretus, dial. 1, pag. 36, in ἀτρέπτῳ.
Theodoret, dialogue 1, p. 36, in the Immutable [Greek].
(printed under page 172)
(67) ‹anchor: in Ezechielis› · call in col 323
Εἰς μέρη τοῦ Ἰεζεκιήλ, in capita quaedam Ezechielis. Euseb., H. E. lib. VI, cap. 26. Sic et Nicephorus H. E. lib. IV, cap. 31.
On parts of Ezekiel, on certain chapters of Ezekiel. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 26. So too Nicephorus, Ecclesiastical History book IV, ch. 31.
(printed under page 172)
(68) ‹anchor: Ezechielem ac Danielem› · call in col 323
Εἰς πολλά τε τῶν προφητῶν, μάλιστα Ἰεζεκιὴλ, καὶ Δανιὴλ τῶν μεγάλων, « in multa prophetarum majorum, Ezechielis maxime et Danielis. » Syncell., pag. 358 Chronograph
[Greek, then Latin:] "On many passages of the major prophets, above all Ezekiel and Daniel." Syncellus, p. 358 of the Chronographia.
(printed under page 172)
Page
- running head: 323 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A § VIII. Commentarii; B τοῦ Ἐζεχίου,; C accurate dimetiebatur,; D chielem ac Danielem
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except Greek incipit); editors' matter: § VIII. Commentarii in Isaiam et Ezechielem (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: Hip-[polyti]
- other: the word Hippolyti was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 324
De dimensione templi Salomonis commentarium, eumdem hucusque in publicam lucem emittere neglexerint. Sigillatius Hippolytus in exponendo Daniele laboravit. S. Hieronymus ejus Commentarium in Danielem generatim notat. Photius qui eumdem commentarium legerat, singula ejus capita expendit atque dicit: Etsi interpretationem Danielis S. Hippolytus ad verbum non explicet, sententiam tamen, ut ita dicam, non praetercurrit. Multa porro, pergit Photius, veteri more, non ut postea fuere accuratius excussa, persequitur. Quanquam eorum posci rationem aequum non est. Neque enim fas ab iis, qui fundamenta rei alicujus consideranda posuerint, rationem repetere eorum, quae praeteriere, sed favere potius conatui ipsi, quantulumcunque in rerum contemplandarum comprehensione processerint. Vitio tamen eidem vertendum putat, quod finem mundi determinare ausus fuerit hoc in tractatu. Persequitur enim Photius: Antichristi vero adventum, cui etiam aspectabilis hujus mundi consummatio jungitur, cum ne discipulis quidem rogantibus, manifestaverit Salvator, ab Hippolyto deinde ad quingentos a Christo annos adduci ac circumscribi, quasi a prima mundi constitutione sex millibus annorum tum exactis, ejus dissolutio instaret, hoc calidioris quidem, quam decebat, animi est, utque asseveratio haec humanam ignorantiam potius quam coelestem inspirationem arguit.
polytus's commentary On the Measurement of the Temple of Solomon, have hitherto neglected to bring the same forth into the public light. More specifically Hippolytus laboured in expounding Daniel. St Jerome notes his Commentary on Daniel in general. Photius, who had read the same commentary, weighs its individual chapters and says: Although St Hippolytus does not unfold the interpretation of Daniel word for word, nevertheless he does not, so to speak, pass over the meaning. Moreover, continues Photius, he pursues many things after the ancient custom, not as they were afterwards more accurately sifted. Although it is not fair that an account of them should be demanded. For neither is it right to demand from those who have laid the foundations of considering any matter an account of the things which they have passed over, but rather to favour the attempt itself, how little soever they have advanced in the comprehension of the things to be contemplated. Nevertheless he thinks it is to be imputed as a fault to the same author that he dared to determine the end of the world in this treatise. For Photius continues: But as for the coming of Antichrist, to which also the consummation of this visible world is joined, whereas the Saviour did not manifest it even to His disciples when they asked Him, that it should then be brought and restricted by Hippolytus to five hundred years from Christ, as if when six thousand years from the first constitution of the world had then been completed its dissolution were at hand, this indeed belongs to a mind rasher than was fitting, and as this assertion proves human ignorance rather than heavenly inspiration.
Idem Photius testatur alibi, quod commentarii Theodoreti in Danielem licet multis antecellant quidem Hippolyti expositionem, et in pluribus disconveniant, in quibusdam tamen conspirent. Sanctus Hieronymus in Danielem scribens, refert sensa S. Hippolyti de septuaginta hebdomadibus Danielis, sed ea reprobat, utpote cum chronologia et historia Persarum ac Macedoniorum irreconciliabilia. En illius verba: Hippolytus de septuaginta eisdem hebdomadibus opinatus est ita. Septem hebdomades ante reditum populi supputat, et sexaginta duas post reditum, usque ad nativitatem Christi: quorum tempora omnino non congruunt, siquidem regni Persarum ducenti et triginta supputantur anni, et Macedonum trecenti, et post illos usque ad nativitatem Domini anni triginta; hoc est, ab initio Cyri regis Persarum usque ad adventum Salvatoris anni quingenti sexaginta. Novissimam quoque hebdomadem ponit in consummatione mundi, quam dividit in Eliae tempora et Antichristi, ut tribus et semis annis ultimae hebdomadis Dei notitia confirmetur, de qua dictum
The same Photius testifies elsewhere that although the commentaries of Theodoret on Daniel in many respects excel the exposition of Hippolytus, and in several points disagree, yet in certain points they agree. St Jerome writing on Daniel reports the opinions of St Hippolytus concerning the seventy weeks of Daniel, but disapproves of them, as being irreconcilable with the chronology and history of the Persians and Macedonians. Lo, his words: Hippolytus concerning the same seventy weeks held thus. He reckons seven weeks before the return of the people, and sixty-two after the return, down to the nativity of Christ: the times of which do not agree at all, since of the kingdom of the Persians two hundred and thirty years are reckoned, and of the Macedonians three hundred, and after them down to the nativity of the Lord thirty years; that is, from the beginning of Cyrus king of the Persians down to the coming of the Saviour five hundred and sixty years. The last week also he places at the consummation of the world, which he divides into the times of Elias and of Antichrist, so that in the three and a half years of the last week the knowledge of God is confirmed, concerning which it is
Editors' notes and page, col. 324
Footnotes
(69) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 324
Fabric. Opp. S. Hippolyt. tom. I, pag. 271; et Bibl. Graec. tom. V, pag. 210.
Fabricius, Works of St Hippolytus, vol. I, p. 271; and Bibliotheca Graeca, vol. V, p. 210.
(printed under page 172)
(70) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 324
Hieronym., Catalog. cap. 61.
Jerome, Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 172)
(71) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 324
Phot., cod. CCII.
Photius, codex 202.
(printed under page 172)
(72) ‹anchor: tamen conspirent› · call in col 324
« Lecta est Theodoreti episcopi Cyri expositio Danielis. Longe doctus hic vir non Hippolyto modo, verum et aliis multis antecellit propheticorum verborum elocutione et explanatione... igitur in aliquibus quidem ille in hac divini Danielis expositione cum Hippolyto martyre convenit, sed plura, in quibus dissentit. » Photius, cod. CCIII.
"There was read the exposition of Daniel by Theodoret, bishop of Cyrus. This very learned man surpasses not Hippolytus only but many others too in the expression and explanation of the prophetic words ... so in this exposition of the divine Daniel he agrees with Hippolytus the martyr in some things, but there are more in which he differs." Photius, codex 203.
(printed under page 172)
(73) ‹anchor: illius verba› · call in col 324
Hieronym. in cap. IX Danielis.
Jerome, on ch. IX of Daniel.
(printed under page 172)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 324
- marginal letters: A polyti De dimensione; B quantulumcunque; C Theodoreti in; D regis Persarum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: polyti De dimensione (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [Hip]polyti; word split at end of column: di-[ctum]
- other: the word dictum was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 325
est (Dan. IX, 27): Confirmabit pactum multis hebdomade una; et tribus aliis annis sub Antichristo deficiat hostia et sacrificium; adveniente autem Christo et iniquum spiritu oris sui interficiente, usque ad consummationem et finem perseveret desolatio. Et revera videtur S. Hippolytus coarctare tempus, quod a primo anno Cyri, et a reditu ex captivitate usque ad Nativitatem dilapsum est, et finem prophetiae a residua praedictione nimis sejungere. Exorditur enim supputationem suam septuaginta hebdomadum a quinquagesimo anno ante finem captivitatis; et ex iis computat sexaginta duas post reditum Judaeorum in patriam suam, usque ad nativitatem Jesu Christi, atque absolutionem seu expletionem rejicit immediate ante mundi consummationem. Oecumenius prooemio in Apocalypsin laudat etiam expositionem Hippolyti in Danielem. In Catena Patrum Graecorum in Psalmos et cantica sacrae Scripturae reperitur fragmentum S. Hippolyti in canticum trium puerorum Hebraeorum in camino ignis, quod canticum constituit partem capitis XXX Danielis. De eodem capite refert Eustratius, presbyter Constantinopolitanus saeculi VII, breve fragmentum in alium locum ejusdem cantici trium puerorum, simulque testatur, quod illud ex oratione secunda, seu tractatu S. Hippolyti in Danielem deprompserit. Post Fabricium Gallandius quoque aliud fragmentum nostri sancti in eumdem prophetam ex Anastasio Sinaita adducit. Verum cum idem locus S. Hippolyti iisdem verbis in tractatu suo in Antichristum numeris 26 et 43 legatur, merito hinc ambigitur, ex quonam horum operum Anastasius Sinaita illum deprompserit.
said (Dan. 9:27): He shall confirm the covenant with many in one week; and in the three other years under Antichrist the victim and the sacrifice shall fail; and when Christ comes and slays the wicked one with the breath of His mouth, the desolation shall endure even to the consummation and the end. And in truth St Hippolytus seems to contract the time which elapsed from the first year of Cyrus, and from the return out of captivity, down to the Nativity, and to separate too much the end of the prophecy from the remaining prediction. For he begins his computation of the seventy weeks from the fiftieth year before the end of the captivity; and out of them he computes sixty-two after the return of the Jews into their own country, down to the nativity of Jesus Christ, and puts off the completion or fulfilment until immediately before the consummation of the world. Oecumenius in his prologue to the Apocalypse also praises the exposition of Hippolytus on Daniel. In the Catena of the Greek Fathers on the Psalms and Canticles of sacred Scripture there is found a fragment of St Hippolytus on the canticle of the three Hebrew children in the furnace of fire, which canticle constitutes a part of chap. 3 of Daniel. On the same chapter Eustratius, presbyter of Constantinople of the 7th century, reports a brief fragment on another passage of the same canticle of the three children, and at the same time testifies that he drew it from the second discourse, or treatise of St Hippolytus on Daniel. After Fabricius, Gallandi also adduces another fragment of our saint on the same prophet from Anastasius of Sinai. Yet since the same passage of St Hippolytus is read in the same words in his treatise On Antichrist at numbers 26 and 43, it is deservedly doubted from this out of which of these works Anastasius of Sinai drew it.
Paulo superius de exiguo tractatu S. Hippolyti in historiam Susannae, qui forte pars fuerit magni operis seu Commentarii in Danielem, disseruimus. Hic solummodo addimus testari Hebed Jesu num. 16 Catalogi, apud Chaldaeos quoque ferri Hippolyti expositionem in Danielem minorem et Susannam. Post exiguum hunc commentarium in Bibliotheca Patrum sequitur fragmentum Latinum alterius cujusdam Hippolyti Operis, cujus titulus est: Sanctissimi Romae episcopi. Fabricius et Gallandius Graece ac Latine hoc fragmentum ediderunt. Est autem hoc exordium seu praeludium
A little above we discoursed concerning the small treatise of St Hippolytus on the history of Susanna, which perhaps was part of the great work or Commentary on Daniel. Here we only add that Ebedjesu at no. 16 of his Catalogue testifies that among the Chaldaeans also there is current an exposition of Hippolytus on the lesser Daniel and Susanna. After this small commentary in the Bibliotheca Patrum there follows a Latin fragment of a certain other Work of Hippolytus, whose title is: Of the Most Holy Bishop of Rome. Fabricius and Gallandi published this fragment in Greek and Latin. Now this is the exordium or prelude
Editors' notes and page, col. 325
Footnotes
(74) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 325
Oecumen. in Biblioth. Coislin. a cl. Montfauconio edita pag. 278.
Oecumenius, in the Bibliotheca Coisliniana edited by the distinguished Montfaucon, p. 278.
(printed under page 173)
(75) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 325
Tom. III edit. Corderianae, pag. 951, ad v. 87, et apud Fabric. tom. I Opp. S. Hippol., pag. 280, et apud Galland., tom. II Bibl. PP., pag. 490.
Vol. III of Corderius's edition, p. 951, at v. 87; and in Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of St Hippolytus, p. 280; and in Gallandi, vol. II of the Bibliotheca Patrum, p. 490.
(printed under page 173)
(76) ‹anchor: breve fragmentum› · call in col 325
Eustrat., cap. 19 advers. Psychopannychitas. Ex Leone Allatio de utriusque Ecclesiae Occidentalis atque Orientalis perpetua in dogmate de purgatorio consensione, pag. 492. Fabric., tom. II Opp. Hippol., pag. 32.
Eustratius, ch. 19 against the Psychopannychites. From Leo Allatius, On the perpetual agreement of both Churches, Western and Eastern, in the doctrine of purgatory, p. 492. Fabricius, vol. II of the Works of Hippolytus, p. 32.
(printed under page 173)
(77) ‹anchor: Gallandius› · call in col 325
Fabric. Opp. S. Hippol. tom. I, pag. 272; Galland. l. c. pag. 490.
Fabricius, Works of St Hippolytus, vol. I, p. 272; Gallandi, at the place cited, p. 490.
(printed under page 173)
(78) ‹anchor: Anastasio Sinaita› · call in col 325
Anastas. Sinait., quaest. 48, pag. 327.
Anastasius of Sinai, question 48, p. 327.
(printed under page 173)
(79) ‹anchor: Catalogi› · call in col 325
Fabric. Biblioth. Graec., vol. V, pag. 206.
Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca, vol. V, p. 206.
(printed under page 173)
(80) ‹anchor: fragmentum Latinum› · call in col 325
Biblioth. Patr. Lugdun., tom. XXVII.
Lyons Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. XXVII.
(printed under page 173)
(81) ‹anchor: ediderunt› · call in col 325
Fabr. tom. I Opp. Hippolyt., pag. 278; Galland. l. c., pag. 446.
Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of Hippolytus, p. 278; Gallandi, at the place cited, p. 446.
(printed under page 173)
Page
- running head: 325 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOL
- marginal letters: A ctum est (Dan.; B Oecumenius prooemio; C tractatu suo; D runt (81). Est
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: ctum est (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [di]ctum
cujusdam auctoris, qui de tempore captivitatis Babylonicae promisit scribere atque simul in prophetam Danielem commentari. Atque haec omnia optime congruunt Hippolyto. Sapientissimus etiam Tillemontius judicat hoc fragmentum satis conforme esse censurae, quam Photius de commentario nostri sancti in Danielem nobis reliquit. Dupinius vero econtrario censet neque hoc fragmentum, neque expositionem brevem historiae de Susanna convenire aetati et characteri divi Hippolyti. Verum quicunque laborem in se vult suscipere comparandi hoc ultimum fragmentum cum alio paulo longiori super Isaacum et Rebeccam a D. Hieronymo relato, certe omnimodam et ingenii et styli deprehendet conformitatem.
of a certain author, who promised to write concerning the time of the Babylonian captivity and at the same time to comment upon the prophet Daniel. And all these things agree very well with Hippolytus. The most learned Tillemont also judges this fragment to be sufficiently conformable to the censure which Photius left to us concerning our saint's commentary on Daniel. Dupin, however, on the contrary, considers that neither this fragment nor the brief exposition of the history of Susanna suits the age and character of Saint Hippolytus. Yet whoever wishes to take upon himself the labour of comparing this last fragment with another slightly longer one upon Isaac and Rebecca related by Saint Jerome, will certainly detect a complete conformity both of genius and of style.
Doctissimus Joannes Mabillonius in Itinere Italico, pag. 94, refert in bibliotheca Chigiana Romae exstare Graecum codicem insignem, ab annis minimum octingentis scriptum, continentem quatuor prophetas majores, item brevem commentarium in somnium Nabuchodonosoris, a S. Hippolyto martyre et episcopo Romae compositum, qui ideo vocatur Romae episcopus, eo quod Romae episcopus gentium ordinatus, et postea Portuensi Ecclesiae praefectus fuerit. In hac explicatione plura occurrunt, quae de eadem visione in tractatu S. Hippolyti De Antichristo habentur, ex quo excerpta esse videntur; quaedam tamen specialia occurrunt, quae in citato tractatu non leguntur. Interpretatio haec ex Chigiano codice Romae anno 1772, et deinde Gottingae anno 1774, edita fuit Graece ac Latine cum Daniele secundum Septuaginta. Georgius Syncellus allegat insuper locum quemdam S. Hippolyti in eumdem prophetam Danielem, verum indeterminate tantum.
The most learned Jean Mabillon in his Iter Italicum, page 94, reports that in the Chigi library at Rome there is extant a notable Greek codex, written at least eight hundred years ago, containing the four major prophets, and likewise a brief commentary on the dream of Nabuchodonosor, composed by Saint Hippolytus, martyr and bishop of Rome, who is for this reason called bishop of Rome, because at Rome he was ordained bishop of the nations, and afterwards was placed in charge of the Church of Porto. In this explanation many things occur which are found concerning the same vision in the treatise of Saint Hippolytus On Antichrist, from which they seem to have been excerpted; certain special things, however, occur which are not read in the cited treatise. This interpretation from the Chigi codex was published at Rome in the year 1772, and thereafter at Göttingen in the year 1774, in Greek and Latin with Daniel according to the Septuagint. George Syncellus alleges in addition a certain passage of Saint Hippolytus on the same prophet Daniel, but only indeterminately.
S. Hieronymus adhuc commentarium in Zachariam S. Hippolyto ascribit; sed nihil ex eo nobis conservavit. Scribens autem doctor maximus in Zachariam, eaque occasione de hoc commentario atque aliis Origenis et Didymi loquens, observat hos omnes plus operae impendisse sensui allegorico eruendo, quam litterali ac historico. Haec fuerunt opera D. Hippolyti pro illustrando Veteri Testamento adornata.
Saint Jerome further ascribes a commentary on Zacharias to Saint Hippolytus; but he has preserved nothing from it for us. Moreover, the greatest doctor, writing on Zacharias, and on that occasion speaking of this commentary and others of Origen and Didymus, observes that all these expended more labour in drawing out the allegorical sense than the literal and historical. These were the works prepared by Saint Hippolytus for illustrating the Old Testament.
Editors' notes and page, col. 326
Footnotes
(82) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 326
Tillemont, Mémoires, tom. III, pag. 108.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, p. 108.
(printed under page 173)
(83) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 326
Dupin., Biblioth. auctor., tom. I, pag. 177 edit. Latin. Colon.
Dupin, Bibliotheca auctorum [Nouvelle bibliothèque des auteurs ecclésiastiques], vol. I, p. 177 of the Latin edition of Cologne.
(printed under page 173)
(84) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 326
Hieronym., Epist. critic., pag. 569 edit. Benedictin. Paris.
Jerome, Critical letters, p. 569 of the Benedictine edition, Paris.
(printed under page 173)
(85) ‹anchor: indeterminate tantum› · call in col 326
Georg. Syncell., pag. 218, et apud Fabric. Opp. Hippolyt., tom. I, pag. 272.
George Syncellus, p. 218, and in Fabricius, Works of Hippolytus, vol. I, p. 272.
(printed under page 173)
(86) ‹anchor: Hippolyto ascribit› · call in col 326
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 173)
(87) ‹anchor: litterali ac historico› · call in col 326
« Scripsit in hunc prophetam (Zachariam) Origenes duo volumina usque ad tertiam partem libri a principio. Hippolytus quoque edidit commentarios, et Didymus quinque explanationum libros, me rogante, dictavit, quos cum aliis tribus in Osee et mihi προσεφώνησεν. Sed tota illorum ἐξήγησις allegorica fuit, et historiae vix pauca tetigerunt. » Hieronym., Praefat. in suos ad Zachar. Comment. et in Catalog., cap. 61
"On this prophet (Zechariah) Origen wrote two volumes, reaching from the beginning to a third of the book. Hippolytus also published commentaries, and Didymus, at my request, dictated five books of explanations, which, with three others on Hosea, he also dedicated to me. But their whole exegesis was allegorical, and they barely touched the history at all." Jerome, Preface to his Commentaries on Zechariah, and in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 173)
Page
- running head: TIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A cujusdam auctoris; B Doctissimus Joannes
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: cujusdam auctoris
§ IX. Commentarii S. Hippolyti in N. T., sc. S. Matthaeum, Lucam, etc.
Section 9. Commentaries of Saint Hippolytus on the New Testament, namely Saint Matthew, Luke, etc.
Quantum ad scripta ejus in Novum Testamentum, Eusebius ne unum quidem memorat; sanctus vero Hieronymus de solo illius in Apocalypsin Commentario mentionem facit, dum in tractatu De viris illustribus opera S. Hippolyti recenset. Sed verisimile est, quod S. Hieronymus illo tempore ea S. Hippolyti scripta in S. Matthaeum nondum viderit, de quibus in opere posteriori mentionem fecit. Theodoretus citat etiam tractatus seu sermones S. Hippolyti De distributione talentorum et De duobus latronibus. Hinc verisimile putant viri docti sanctum nostrum in quasdam saltem partes Evangelii S. Matthaei, atque sine dubio in quaedam loca Evangelii S. Lucae, in quo historia de duobus latronibus uberius enarratur, commentarios exarasse. Quamquam autem hic terminus, λόγους, posset denotare apud Theodoretum homilias, nihilominus tamen D. Hieronymus inter commentarios in S. Scripturam recenset aliquem horum λόγων seu sermonum a Theodoreto citatorum. In Catena Patrum Graecorum super Lucam reperitur etiam aliquis S. Hippolyti locus.
As for his writings on the New Testament, Eusebius does not mention even one; Saint Jerome, however, makes mention only of his Commentary on the Apocalypse, while reviewing the works of Saint Hippolytus in his treatise On Illustrious Men. But it is probable that Saint Jerome at that time had not yet seen those writings of Saint Hippolytus on Saint Matthew, of which he made mention in a later work. Theodoret also cites treatises or sermons of Saint Hippolytus On the Distribution of the Talents and On the Two Thieves. Hence learned men think it probable that our saint penned commentaries on at least certain parts of the Gospel of Saint Matthew, and without doubt on certain passages of the Gospel of Saint Luke, in which the history of the two thieves is more fully narrated. Moreover, although this term, λόγους, could denote homilies in Theodoret, nevertheless Saint Jerome reckons among the commentaries on Sacred Scripture one of these λόγων or sermons cited by Theodoret. In the Catena of the Greek Fathers upon Luke there is also found a certain passage of Saint Hippolytus.
§ X. Commentarii S. Hippolyti in Joannis Evangelium et Apocalypsin.
Section 10. Commentaries of Saint Hippolytus on the Gospel of John and the Apocalypse.
In tabula Graeca saepe jam laudata cum Cyclo paschali effossa perspicue notatur, quod S. Hippolytus scripserit in Evangelium secundum S. Joannem et in Apocalypsin : Ὑπὲρ τοῦ κατὰ Ἰωάννην Εὐαγγελίου καὶ Ἀποκαλύψεως. Idipsum confirmat S. Hieronymus quantum ad Apocalypsin. Notum est omnibus, qualis quantaque de istis libris agitata fuerit controversia exeunte saeculo secundo et ineunte tertio, non tantum propter Cerinthum, sed cum Artemon et sibi similes divinitatem Jesu Christi negarent, et arma quibus orthodoxi illam asserebant, illis eripere conarentur, primo Evangelium Joannis et illius Apocalypsin profani invaserunt, et cum variis locis ex Evangelio et Apocalypsi petitis ad Λόγου divinitatem confirmandam non possent respondere, et verba evangelistae et apostoli ita stringere animadverterent, ut nulla arte nullisque interpretationibus pravis vis illorum posset declinari; non aliter sibi, et pravitati suae haereseos
In the Greek table already often praised, dug up with the Paschal Cycle, it is clearly noted that Saint Hippolytus wrote on the Gospel according to Saint John and on the Apocalypse: On Behalf of the Gospel according to John and the Apocalypse. Saint Jerome confirms the very same thing as regards the Apocalypse. It is known to all what sort and how great a controversy was agitated concerning those books at the close of the second century and the beginning of the third, not only on account of Cerinthus, but since Artemon and those like him denied the divinity of Jesus Christ, and endeavoured to wrest from the orthodox the weapons whereby they asserted it, the profane men first attacked the Gospel of John and his Apocalypse, and since they could not reply to the various passages drawn from the Gospel and the Apocalypse to confirm the divinity of the Word, and noticed that the words of the evangelist and apostle pressed so closely that by no art and by no perverse interpretations could their force be evaded; in no other way for themselves and their depraved heresy
Editors' notes and page, col. 327
Footnotes
(88) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 327
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 174)
(89) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 327
« Legisse me fateor ante annos plurimos in Matthaeum... Hippolyti martyris opuscula ... e quibus etiamsi pauca carperem, dignum aliquid memoria scriberetur. » Hieronym., Praefat. in Matth.
"I confess that many years ago I read on Matthew ... the little works of Hippolytus the martyr ... from which, even if I culled only a little, something worth remembering might be written." Jerome, Preface on Matthew.
(printed under page 174)
(90) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 327
Theodor., dialog. 2, pag. 2 et 79, et dialog. 3, pag. 156. Vide Fabr. tom. I Opp. Hippol., pag. 281, et Galland. tom. II Biblioth. PP., pag. 498.
Theodoret, dialogue 2, pp. 2 and 79, and dialogue 3, p. 156. See Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of Hippolytus, p. 281, and Gallandi, vol. II of the Bibliotheca Patrum, p. 498.
(printed under page 174)
(91) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 327
Hist. littér. de la France, tom. I, pag. 379.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, p. 379.
(printed under page 174)
(92) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 327
« Hippolytus.... scripsit nonnullos in Scripturas commentarios, e quibus hos reperi: in Hexaemeron... in Isaiam, XXXIII. » Hieronym., De vir. illustr., cap. 61. Et Theodoretus in dialog. 1, pag. 36, ait: « Sancti Hippolyti ex sermone in exordium Isaiae. »
"Hippolytus ... wrote a number of commentaries on the Scriptures, of which I have found these: on the Hexaemeron ... on Isaiah, XXXIII." Jerome, On Illustrious Men, ch. 61. And Theodoret, in dialogue 1, p. 36, says: "Of St Hippolytus, from the sermon on the beginning of Isaiah."
(printed under page 174)
(93) ‹anchor: Hippolyti locus› · call in col 327
Catena Patr. Corderianae ad Lucae II, 15, pag. 33.
Corderius's Catena Patrum, at Luke 2:15, p. 33.
(printed under page 174)
(94) ‹anchor: quantum ad Apocalypsin› · call in col 327
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 174)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A § IX. Commentarii; B quaedam loca Evangelii; C nem et in Apocalypsin; D set declinari; non
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: § IX. Commentarii; hae- split at column break
consultum iri existimaverunt, quam negando auctoritatem, et Evangelii, et Apocalypseos, et Epistolarum D. Joannis. Quod tanta cum inverecundia fecerunt isti haeretici, et tanto cum divinitatis Λόγου odio, ut quamplurimi inter orthodoxos exstiterint, qui vindicias laesae divinitatis Christi alacriter paraverint, et Evangelium, Epistolas, Apocalypsin Joanni evangelistae asseruerint, inter quos eminuerunt S. Justinus martyr, S. Irenaeus, Theophilus Antiochenus, Clemens Alexandrinus, S. Melito Sardensis, et S. Hippolytus. Haec cl. le Moynius, qui deinde concludit, quod ideo dicatur hic (sc. Hippolytus) scripsisse in Evangelium et Apocalypsin, ut ista opera esse ejusdem auctoris persuaderet et confirmaret. Verum quicunque praetendere vellet, ut sapienter observat Basnagius, hoc ex motivo sanctum Hippolytum nostrum operam impendisse ad scribendum super hunc librum, is revera divinaretur. Scaliger nihilominus videtur hujus sententiae fuisse, dum scribit opus sancti Hippolyti in Apocalypsin nihil aliud fuisse quam apologiam pro illius auctoritate defendenda contra Alogos. Hebed Jesu sane testatur, quemadmodum Basnagius et Fabricius referunt, quod Chaldaei ostendant Apologiam S. Hippolyti pro Apocalypsi et Evangelio sancti Joannis. Sed quae, amabo! fides habenda testimonio rabbini? In bibliotheca Bodleiana inter libros Huntingtonianos exstat Arabice exploratio Apocalypseos ex Severo, Hippolyto et aliis, quam Latine versam praestantissimo viro Joanni Gagnierio fortasse debebunt eruditi, scribit cl. Fabricius. Sed quantum ego scio, lucem publicam nondum vidit. Caeterum per commentarios in Apocalypsin, Sixto Senensi etiam memoratos, Rivetus intelligit librum de Antichristo. Fabricius imprimi curavit fragmentum haud exiguum, in quo sanctus Hippolytus exponit haec Proverbiorum cap. IX verba : Sapientia aedificavit sibi domum; sibique persuasit, in Joannis Evangelistae locum quemdam haec ab Hippolyto potius scripta esse, quam in Proverbiorum loca, licet et in haec etiam commentatus fuerit. In tabula operum S. Hippolyti legitur insuper Hippolytum nostrum Odas et Carmina scripsisse in omnes S. Scripturae libros.
did they think provision would be made, than by denying the authority both of the Gospel, and of the Apocalypse, and of the Epistles of Saint John. Which those heretics did with such shamelessness, and with such hatred of the divinity of the Word, that very many stood forth among the orthodox who eagerly prepared a defence of the injured divinity of Christ, and asserted the Gospel, the Epistles, and the Apocalypse as belonging to John the Evangelist, among whom were eminent Saint Justin Martyr, Saint Irenaeus, Theophilus of Antioch, Clement of Alexandria, Saint Melito of Sardis, and Saint Hippolytus. Thus the illustrious Le Moyne, who then concludes that he (namely Hippolytus) is therefore said to have written on the Gospel and the Apocalypse in order that he might persuade and confirm that those works were of the same author. Yet whoever should wish to maintain, as Basnage wisely observes, that from this motive our Saint Hippolytus expended labour in writing upon this book, would in truth be merely guessing. Scaliger nevertheless seems to have been of this opinion, when he writes that the work of Saint Hippolytus on the Apocalypse was nothing other than an apology for defending its authority against the Alogi. Ebedjesu indeed testifies, as Basnage and Fabricius report, that the Chaldeans show an Apology of Saint Hippolytus for the Apocalypse and the Gospel of Saint John. But what credit, I pray, is to be given to the testimony of a rabbi? In the Bodleian library among the Huntington books there is extant in Arabic an investigation of the Apocalypse from Severus, Hippolytus, and others, which, translated into Latin, the learned will perhaps owe to the most distinguished man Jean Gagnier, writes the illustrious Fabricius. But so far as I know, it has not yet seen the public light. For the rest, by the commentaries on the Apocalypse, mentioned also by Sixtus of Siena, Rivet understands the book on Antichrist. Fabricius had printed a not inconsiderable fragment, in which Saint Hippolytus expounds these words of chapter 9 of Proverbs: Wisdom has built herself a house (Prov. 9:1); and he persuaded himself that these things were written by Hippolytus rather on a certain passage of John the Evangelist than on the passages of Proverbs, although he commented on these also. In the table of the works of Saint Hippolytus it is read in addition that our Hippolytus wrote Odes and Songs on all the books of Sacred Scripture.
Editors' notes and page, col. 328
Footnotes
(95) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 328
Le Moyne, Var. sac., pag. 1010 et seq., tom. II.
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, p. 1010 ff., vol. II.
(printed under page 174)
(96) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 328
Canis., Lect. antiq., tom. I, pag. 7.
Canisius, Lectiones antiquae, vol. I, p. 7.
(printed under page 174)
(97) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 328
Scaliger., ibid., pag. 14, et apud Fabric. tom. I, pag. 82.
Scaliger, ibid., p. 14, and in Fabricius, vol. I, p. 82.
(printed under page 174)
(98) ‹anchor: Hebed Jesu› · call in col 328
Hebed Jesu in Catalog. librorum Chaldaeor.
Ebedjesu, in the Catalogue of Chaldean books.
(printed under page 174)
(99) ‹anchor: Basnagius› · call in col 328
Basnage apud Canis. Lect. antiq., tom. I, pag. 14.
Basnage, in Canisius, Lectiones antiquae, vol. I, p. 14.
(printed under page 174)
(1) ‹anchor: Fabricius› · call in col 328
Fabric., Hippol. Opp. tom. I, pag. 280.
Fabricius, Works of Hippolytus, vol. I, p. 280.
(printed under page 174)
(2) ‹anchor: cl. Fabricius› · call in col 328
Idem ibid.
The same, ibid.
(printed under page 174)
(3) ‹anchor: Rivetus› · call in col 328
Rivet., Critic. S. lib. II, 11.
Rivet, Critica sacra, book II, 11.
(printed under page 174)
(4) ‹anchor: commentatus fuerit› · call in col 328
Fabric., tom. I Opp. Hippolyt., pag. 282.
Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of Hippolytus, p. 282.
(printed under page 174)
(5) ‹anchor: Scripturae libros› · call in col 328
Ὠδαὶ εἰς πάσας τὰς Γραφάς. Ita Scaliger legit. Edmund. Bernardus omittit vocabulum Ὠδαί, et legit εἰς ἁπάσας τὰς Γραφάς, vel εἰς Δανιὴλ καὶ (continues)
Odes on all the Scriptures. So Scaliger reads. Edmund Bernard omits the word Odes, and reads On all the Scriptures, or On Daniel and (continues)
(printed under page 174)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A reseos consultum iri; B tendere vellet, ut; C pseos ex Severo,; D mina scripsisse in
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: reseos consultum iri; reseos split from previous column
ARTICULUS II.
Article 2.
DE ALIIS FRAGMENTIS ET OPERIBUS DEPERDITIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
On the Other Fragments and Lost Works of Saint Hippolytus.
§ I. Alia duo opuscula S. Hippolyti de Pascha.
Section 1. Two Other Short Works of Saint Hippolytus on Easter.
Praeter Cyclum paschalem, de quo paulo superius disseruimus, Eusebius et S. Hieronymus alia etiam duo opuscula sancto Hippolyto de eadem materia ascribunt. Quemadmodum hi scriptores illa ab invicem palam distinguunt, ita et nos post eos distinguere debemus. In primo horum operum sanctus Hippolytus adornat chronologiam, quam ad primum usque imperii Alexandri Severi annum deducit, id est usque ad annum 222 aerae Christianae. Juxta Eusebium constituit in eo describere temporum seriem, habito tamen semper respectu ad Pascha pro inveniendo nimirum determinato tempore, quo illud celebrandum esset. Atque propterea in eodem opere proposuit cyclum sexdecim annorum. Haec forte Chronologia illud scriptum est, quod in tabula Graeca his terminis notatur : Ἀπόδειξις χρόνων τοῦ Πάσχα, Demonstratio temporum Paschae.
Besides the Paschal Cycle, concerning which we discoursed a little above, Eusebius and Saint Jerome ascribe also two other short works on the same subject to Saint Hippolytus. Just as these writers openly distinguish them from each other, so we too after them ought to distinguish them. In the first of these works Saint Hippolytus prepares a chronology, which he brings down to the first year of the reign of Alexander Severus, that is, down to the year 222 of the Christian era. According to Eusebius he undertook in it to describe the series of times, yet always having regard to Easter, namely for finding the determinate time at which it was to be celebrated. And on that account in the same work he proposed a cycle of sixteen years. Perhaps this Chronology is that writing which in the Greek table is noted in these terms: Ἀπόδειξις χρόνων τοῦ Πάσχα, Demonstration of the Times of Easter.
Sapientissimus Tillemontius hanc Chronologiam ab alio scripto de eadem materia distinguens, cui et indidit nomen Chronici, inquit quod sanctus Hippolytus designet hoc in opere Paschata juxta regulas cycli sui; subdit quoque quod sanctus noster posuerit ad finem tabulam dierum, quibus credebat imposterum agendum esse Pascha, perdurante definito annorum numero. Hoc ipsum forte S. Hieronymus sequentibus indigitare voluit verbis : Rationem Paschae temporumque canones scripsit (sc. Hippolytus); hoc itaque opus integrum verosimiliter complectebatur opus de Pascha.
The most learned Tillemont, distinguishing this Chronology from another writing on the same subject, to which he also gave the name of Chronicle, says that Saint Hippolytus designates in this work the Easters according to the rules of his cycle; he adds also that our saint placed at the end a table of the days on which he believed Easter was to be kept in the future, throughout a defined number of years. Perhaps Saint Jerome wished to indicate this very thing by the following words: He (namely Hippolytus) wrote the Reckoning of Easter and the canons of times; this whole work therefore probably comprised the work on Easter.
Postquam Eusebius et sanctus Hieronymus de labore S. Hippolyti in adornando calculo temporum relate ad Pascha locuti fuere, atque plurium aliorum operum sancti nostri titulos retulerunt, observant adhuc aliud ejusdem scriptum de Pascha; an vero hoc idem sit cum Chronico, quod Tillemontius a Chronologia distinguit? vel potius tractatus aliquis moralis de Paschate? historia nihil nobis peculiare de hoc subministrante, determinari nequit. Hoc solummodo scimus, quod concilium
After Eusebius and Saint Jerome have spoken of the labour of Saint Hippolytus in preparing the calculation of times in relation to Easter, and have related the titles of many other works of our saint, they notice yet another writing of his on Easter; but whether this is the same with the Chronicle, which Tillemont distinguishes from the Chronology, or rather some moral treatise on Easter, since history supplies us with nothing particular concerning this, cannot be determined. This only we know, that the Council
Editors' notes and page, col. 329
Footnotes
(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 329
« Eodem tempore et Hippolytus inter plurima alia ingenii sui monumenta, librum De Pascha composuit, in quo temporum seriem describens et canonem quemdam paschalem per sexdecim annorum circulum exhibens, anno primo imperatoris Alexandri computationem temporum circumscribit. Ex reliquis autem illius scriptis haec sunt..... de Pascha. » Euseb. H. E. lib. VI, cap. 22; Hieronymus, De script. eccles., in Catalog., cap. 61.
"At the same time Hippolytus too, among very many other monuments of his genius, composed a book On the Pasch, in which, describing the series of the times and setting out a paschal canon over a cycle of sixteen years, he ends his computation of the times at the first year of the emperor Alexander. Of his other writings these are ... on the Pasch." Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 22; Jerome, On Ecclesiastical Writers, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 175)
(7) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 329
Euseb. l. c.
Eusebius, at the place cited.
(printed under page 175)
(8) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 329
Tillemont, Mémoir., tom. III, pag. 105.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, p. 105.
(printed under page 175)
(9) ‹anchor: S. Hieronymus› · call in col 329
Hieronym., l. c.
Jerome, at the place cited.
(printed under page 175)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A ARTICULUS II.; B pro inveniendo nimirum; C voluit verbis : Rationem; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: ARTICULUS II.; con- split at column break
in Laterano anno 649 celebratum allegat quemdam locum homiliae sancti Hippolyti in Dominicam Paschae.
celebrated in the Lateran in the year 649 alleges a certain passage of a homily of Saint Hippolytus on Easter Sunday.
§ II. De resurrectione, S. Hippolyti tractatus.
Section 2. Treatise of Saint Hippolytus On the Resurrection.
Sanctus Hieronymus enumerationem scriptorum S. Hippolyti instituens, eidem ascribit librum De resurrectione. Hoc opusculum in tabula Graeca notatum reperitur hoc sub titulo, unde uberior notitia hauriri potest : Περὶ ΘΥ καὶ σαρκὸς ἀναστάσεως, De Deo et carnis resurrectione. Fabricius et Gallandius referunt fragmentum sancti Hippolyti de hac materia, quod ex Anastasio Sinaita desumpserunt, qui illud sub hoc titulo allegavit : De resurrectione et incorruptione. Hunc tractatum De Deo et carnis resurrectione contra Berillum et Arabas compositum primo crediderat cl. le Moynius, ea admodum incerta inductus opinione, quod sanctus noster episcopus in Arabia episcopatum gesserit, ibique diu vixerit. Sed paulo infra mutata sententia, censuit per tractatum Hippolyti Περὶ Θεοῦ καὶ ἀναστάσεως σαρκὸς, intelligendum esse illius opus πρὸς Μαρκίωνα, contra Marcionem. Scaliger econtra opinatur per hoc opus indigitari librum De duabus naturis Christi, quem ab Hippolyto conscriptum fuisse auctor est Theodoretus. Verum haud satis perspicimus, quanam cognatione opinio Scaligeri et titulus hujus operis, de quo agimus, contineantur. Potius verosimile nobis videtur cl. Basnagium laudatum opus cum alio de incarnatione confudisse.
Saint Jerome, drawing up an enumeration of the writings of Saint Hippolytus, ascribes to him a book On the Resurrection. This short work is found noted in the Greek table under this title, whence fuller knowledge can be drawn: Περὶ ΘΥ καὶ σαρκὸς ἀναστάσεως, On God and the Resurrection of the Flesh. Fabricius and Gallandi report a fragment of Saint Hippolytus on this subject, which they took from Anastasius Sinaita, who alleged it under this title: On the Resurrection and Incorruption. The illustrious Le Moyne had at first believed that this treatise On God and the Resurrection of the Flesh was composed against Beryllus and the Arabians, led by that very uncertain opinion that our saintly bishop held an episcopate in Arabia and lived there a long time. But a little below, having changed his opinion, he considered that by the treatise of Hippolytus Περὶ Θεοῦ καὶ ἀναστάσεως σαρκὸς is to be understood his work πρὸς Μαρκίωνα, Against Marcion. Scaliger on the contrary opines that by this work is indicated the book On the Two Natures of Christ, which Theodoret is the authority for having been written by Hippolytus. Yet we do not sufficiently perceive by what kinship the opinion of Scaliger and the title of this work, of which we are treating, are held together. Rather it seems probable to us that the illustrious Basnage confused the work cited with another on the incarnation.
§ III. Tractatus contra omnes haereses.
Section 3. Treatise Against All Heresies.
Testantur Eusebius atque Hieronymus scripsisse S. Hippolytum tractatum contra omnes haereses, hoc est sine dubio, ut observant Maurini nostri, contra omnes haereses quae ex Orco prodierunt a tempore S. Irenaei usque ad suam aetatem. A multis aliis antiquis auctoribus hoc opus sub nomine S. Hippolyti citatum reperitur, Photiique aetate adhuc quoque exstabat, qui istud legisse comperitur. De illo enim pro more suo judicium suum tulit his verbis : Lectus est Hippolyti libellus, qui Irenaei discipulus fuit. Est hoc volumen adversus haereses duas et triginta, faciens initium a Dositheanis, et in Noeto ac Noetianis desinens.
Eusebius and Jerome testify that Saint Hippolytus wrote a treatise Against All Heresies, that is without doubt, as our Maurists observe, against all the heresies which came forth from Orcus from the time of Saint Irenaeus down to his own age. By many other ancient authors this work is found cited under the name of Saint Hippolytus, and in the age of Photius also it was still extant, who is found to have read it. For concerning it, after his custom, he delivered his judgement in these words: Read was the little book of Hippolytus, who was a disciple of Irenaeus. This volume is against thirty-two heresies, making a beginning from the Dositheans, and ending in Noetus and the Noetians.
Editors' notes and page, col. 330
Footnotes
(10) ‹anchor: Dominicam Paschae› · call in col 330
Fabric., Opp. Hippolyt. tom. I, pag. 281
Fabricius, Works of Hippolytus, vol. I, p. 281.
(printed under page 175)
(11) ‹anchor: Sanctus Hieronymus› · call in col 330
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 175)
(12) ‹anchor: Fabricius› · call in col 330
Fabric., l. c., pag. 244; Galland., l. c. pag. 495.
Fabricius, at the place cited, p. 244; Gallandi, at the place cited, p. 495.
(printed under page 175)
(13) ‹anchor: et incorruptione› · call in col 330
Anastas. Sinaita, in Hodego, pag. 335.
Anastasius of Sinai, in the Hodegos, p. 335.
(printed under page 175)
(14) ‹anchor: le Moynius› · call in col 330
Le Moyne, Var. sacra, tom. II, pag. 1112.
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, vol. II, p. 1112.
(printed under page 175)
(15) ‹anchor: paulo infra› · call in col 330
Idem ibid., pag. 1115.
The same, ibid., p. 1115.
(printed under page 175)
(16) ‹anchor: Theodoretus› · call in col 330
Scaliger apud Fabric. tom. I, pag. 88.
Scaliger, in Fabricius, vol. I, p. 88.
(printed under page 175)
(17) ‹anchor: Eusebius› · call in col 330
Euseb., H. E. lib. V, cap. 22.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book V [sic], ch. 22.
(printed under page 175)
(18) ‹anchor: Hieronymus› · call in col 330
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61.
(printed under page 175)
(19) ‹anchor: Maurini nostri› · call in col 330
Histoire littéraire de la France, tom. I, pag. 383.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, p. 383.
(printed under page 175)
(20) ‹anchor: antiquis auctoribus› · call in col 330
Βιωφελέστατον σύνταγμα appellat Nicephorus H. E. lib. IV, c. 31. Vid. Tillemont, Mémoires, tom. III, pag. 107, et Fabric. Hippol. tom. I, pag. 223 et 225.
Nicephorus, Ecclesiastical History book IV, ch. 31, calls it a treatise most profitable for life. See Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, p. 107, and Fabricius, Hippolytus, vol. I, pp. 223 and 225.
(printed under page 175)
(21) ‹anchor: his verbis› · call in col 330
Phot., cod. CXXI Biblioth.
Photius, Bibliotheca, codex 121.
(printed under page 175)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A cilium in Laterano; B tractatum De Deo; C § III. Tractatus contra; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: cilium in Laterano; cilium split from previous column, de- split at column break
- other: the word desinens. was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 331
Harum ait confutationem se suscepisse ex sermonibus Irenaei, quorum compendium hoc se libro complexum refert. Dictio perspicua et concinna, nec abundans, licet atticismi rationes non adeo curat. Habet et tum alia minus accurata, tum quod Paulum Epistolae ad Hebraeos auctorem esse negat. Nullus quoque ambigendi locus est, quin Memoria haeresum S. Hippolyti, ex qua Gelasius papa duo loca seu fragmenta refert, idem sit opusculum cum tractatu contra omnes haereses. Caeterum de hoc tractatu hodie nihil amplius exstat praeter duo haec fragmenta. Sed in Bibliotheca Patrum occurrit aliquod scriptum sub nomine S. Hippolyti hoc cum titulo : Homilia de Deo trino et uno, et de mysterio incarnationis contra haeresin Noeti. Viris doctis, qui majori acribia hoc scriptum examinarunt, omnino persuasum est, quod illud pro fragmento longioris operis, et pro extrema parte tractatus Hippolytei adversus haereses habendum sit. Neque obstat, inquit cl. Fabricius, quod fideles quandoque auctor alloquitur, ut in homiliis fieri solet; nam hoc etiam in scriptis facere veteres, et ad lectores respicere, tralatitium. Chronicon Alexandrinum, quod vulgo Paschale vocant, citat aliquem locum ex S. Hippolyti opere contra omnes haereses, in quo asserit Christum postremo vitae suae anno Pascha legale non celebrasse. Idem Chronicon refert etiam alium hujus S. episcopi ac martyris locum e primo suo libro De Paschate, quo ostenderet Christum in pervigilio mortis suae agnum paschalem non comedisse. Utrumque habes apud Fabricium et Gallandium.
Of these he says that he undertook the refutation from the discourses of Irenaeus, a compendium of which he reports that he embraced in this book. The diction is clear and neat, nor redundant, although he does not much care for the rules of Atticism. He has also both other less accurate things, and that he denies that Paul is the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. There is also no room for doubting that the Memorial of Heresies of Saint Hippolytus, from which Pope Gelasius reports two passages or fragments, is the same short work with the treatise Against All Heresies. For the rest, of this treatise nothing more is extant today besides these two fragments. But in the Bibliotheca Patrum there occurs a certain writing under the name of Saint Hippolytus with this title: Homily on God Triune and One, and on the Mystery of the Incarnation against the Heresy of Noetus. Learned men, who have examined this writing with greater exactness, are altogether persuaded that it is to be held for a fragment of a longer work, and for the last part of the Hippolytean treatise Against Heresies. Nor does it stand in the way, says the illustrious Fabricius, that the author sometimes addresses the faithful, as is wont to be done in homilies; for that the ancients did this in writings also, and looked towards the readers, is customary. The Alexandrian Chronicle, which they commonly call the Paschal, cites a certain passage from the work of Saint Hippolytus Against All Heresies, in which he asserts that Christ in the last year of His life did not celebrate the legal Passover. The same Chronicle reports also another passage of this saintly bishop and martyr from his first book On Easter, whereby he showed that Christ on the eve of His death did not eat the paschal lamb. You have both in Fabricius and Gallandi.
Verisimile sane est, quod S. Hippolytus in hac generali refutatione haeresum, falsa Valentinianorum dogmata admirabili, prout refert Epiphanius, quadam facultate refutarit. Huc etiam referimus, quae Theodoretus et quidam antiquus auctor (Stephanus Gobar) apud Photium allegatus de scriptis sancti Hippolyti contra Nicolaitas et Montanistas tradiderunt. Hebed Jesu in Catalogo librorum Chaldaicorum memorat S. Hippolyti adversus Caium capita, haereticum
It is indeed probable that Saint Hippolytus in this general refutation of heresies refuted the false dogmas of the Valentinians with a certain admirable ability, as Epiphanius reports. Hither also we refer what Theodoret and a certain ancient author (Stephen Gobar) alleged in Photius have handed down concerning the writings of Saint Hippolytus against the Nicolaitans and Montanists. Ebedjesu in the Catalogue of Chaldean Books mentions the heads of Saint Hippolytus against Caius, the heretic
Editors' notes and page, col. 331
Footnotes
(22) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 331
Gelas., tom. VIII Biblioth. Patr., pag. 704; Fabric., Opp. Hippolyt. tom. I, pag. 225.
Gelasius, vol. VIII of the Bibliotheca Patrum, p. 704; Fabricius, Works of Hippolytus, vol. I, p. 225.
(printed under page 176)
(23) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 331
Biblioth. Patr. tom. III, pag. 261-264.
Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. III, pp. 261–264.
(printed under page 176)
(24) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 331
Tillemont, Mémoir., tom. III, pag. 107; Ceillier, Hist. génér., tom. II, pag. 341; Maurini in Hist. littér. de la France, tom. I, pag. 384; Fabric., tom. I Opp. Hippolyt., pag. 223-225.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, p. 107; Ceillier, Histoire générale, vol. II, p. 341; the Maurists in Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, p. 384; Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of Hippolytus, pp. 223–225.
(printed under page 176)
(25) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 331
Fabric. l. c. pag. 235.
Fabricius, at the place cited, p. 235.
(printed under page 176)
(26) ‹anchor: Chronicon Alexandrinum› · call in col 331
Chron. Alexand. pasch., edit. Du Cange, pag. 6.
Chronicon Alexandrinum [Paschale], Du Cange's edition, p. 6.
(printed under page 176)
(27) ‹anchor: Fabricium et Gallandium› · call in col 331
Fabric. l. c., pag. 224 et 43; Galland., Biblioth. PP. tom. II, pag. 499.
Fabricius, at the place cited, pp. 224 and 43; Gallandi, Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. II, p. 499.
(printed under page 176)
(28) ‹anchor: Epiphanius› · call in col 331
Epiphan. haeres. 31, num. 33, tom. I, p. 205.
Epiphanius, Heresy 31, no. 33, vol. I, p. 205.
(printed under page 176)
(29) ‹anchor: Theodoretus› · call in col 331
« Contra hos (Nicolaitas) scripsit praedictus Clemens, et Irenaeus, et Origenes, et Hippolytus episcopus et martyr. » Theodoret., lib. III Haeret. fab., cap. 1.
"Against these (the Nicolaitans) wrote the aforesaid Clement, and Irenaeus, and Origen, and Hippolytus, bishop and martyr." Theodoret, Compendium of Heretical Fables book III, ch. 1.
(printed under page 176)
(30) ‹anchor: allegatus› · call in col 331
« Ad haec qualem opinionem habuerit Hippolytus et Epiphanius de Nicolao e septem diaconis uno, et quod valide illum condemnet. » Stephan. Gobar apud Photium codice CCXXXII.
"Besides this, what opinion Hippolytus and Epiphanius held of Nicolas, one of the seven deacons, and that he [Hippolytus] strongly condemns him." Stephen Gobar, in Photius, codex 232.
(printed under page 176)
(31) ‹anchor: Montanistas› · call in col 331
« Inter octodecim articulos, quos Stephanus Gobar examinandos sibi proposuit, occurrit et unus, in quo is auctor inquirit quaenam fuerit S. Hippolyti sententia circa haeresin Montanistarum: Quid senserit beatus Hippolytus de haeresi Montanistarum. » Phot. l. c. Unde conjicere licet, Montanistas abs S. Hippolyto impugnatos fuisse.
"Among the eighteen articles which Stephen Gobar set himself to examine there is also one in which that author asks what St Hippolytus's opinion was concerning the heresy of the Montanists: What the blessed Hippolytus thought of the heresy of the Montanists." Photius, at the place cited. From which one may conjecture that the Montanists were attacked by St Hippolytus.
(printed under page 176)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A sinens. Harum ait; B doctis, qui majori; C agnum paschalem non; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: sinens. Harum ait; sinens split from previous column
scilicet, de quo Irenaeus l. I, cap. 35. Necessarium autem nullatenus est, ut statuamus Hippolytum speciales tractatus contra Nicolaitas, Montanistas, Valentinianos ac Caianos scripsisse; sufficit, quod hos omnes in suo generali tractatu contra omnes haereses refutarit.
namely, concerning whom Irenaeus, book 1, chapter 35. Now it is in no way necessary that we should establish that Hippolytus wrote special treatises against the Nicolaitans, Montanists, Valentinians, and Caians; it suffices that he refuted all these in his general treatise Against All Heresies.
§ IV. Hippolyti liber contra Marcionem.
Section 4. Book of Hippolytus Against Marcion.
Singillatim etiam adversus Marcionem S. Hippolytum scripsisse testatur Hieronymus, ex quo non satis certum apparet, num librum De resurrectione Marcioni opposuerit. Ἀντιῤῥητικὸν πρὸς Μαρκίωνα vocat Nicephorus, qui librum De resurrectione non memorat, quemadmodum nec Syncellus, pagina 358, testatus Hippolytum πρὸς Μαρκίωνα καὶ τὰς λοιπὰς αἱρέσεις scripsisse. Tillemontio videtur, etiam oppositum Marcioni volumen fuisse, quod scripserat Hippolytus Περὶ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ, καὶ πόθεν τὸ κακόν, memoratque Eusebius. A Theodoreto inter eos, qui ἄριστα καὶ σοφώτατα Marcionem confutarunt, Hippolytus noster quoque celebratur.
That Saint Hippolytus also wrote singly against Marcion is testified by Jerome, from whom it does not appear sufficiently certain whether he opposed the book On the Resurrection to Marcion. Nicephorus calls it Ἀντιῤῥητικὸν πρὸς Μαρκίωνα, who does not mention the book On the Resurrection, just as neither does Syncellus, page 358, testifying that Hippolytus wrote πρὸς Μαρκίωνα καὶ τὰς λοιπὰς αἱρέσεις. To Tillemont it seems that the volume also opposed to Marcion was that which Hippolytus had written Περὶ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ, καὶ πόθεν τὸ κακόν, and which Eusebius mentions. By Theodoret, among those who refuted Marcion ἄριστα καὶ σοφώτατα, our Hippolytus also is celebrated.
Opus Περὶ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ καὶ πόθεν τὸ κακόν in laterculo notatum, in Florinum presbyterum, aequalem illorum temporum, qui Deum mali auctorem faciebat, scriptum statuit Scaliger, refutatus propterea a cl. le Moynio qui probare conatus est non contra Florinum, sed contra Cerdonianos, Marcionitas, Hermogenianos, et alios, qui varia statuebant principia, et unum auctorem boni, alterum mali admittebant, Hippolytum nostrum exarasse hunc librum. Florinus enim unicum admittebat Deum, et principium; sed illi bonum et malum tribuere non reformidabat. Alii vero haeretici varia agnoscebant principia, ut cuilibet sic possent tribuere ea, quae illi magis congrua et consentanea judicabant : unum bonum, auctorem et fontem omnis boni; alterum justum, rigidum, implacabile, conditorem universi; tertium materiam aeternam, vel Deum imperantem materiae, unde omnia mala in mundum irrepserunt. Caeterum bene observant Maurini nostri has Scaligeri, le Moynii et Tillemontii opiniones conjecturarum sphaeram non
The work Περὶ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ καὶ πόθεν τὸ κακόν noted in the list, Scaliger established to have been written against Florinus the presbyter, a contemporary of those times, who made God the author of evil, being refuted on that account by the illustrious Le Moyne, who endeavoured to prove that our Hippolytus penned this book not against Florinus, but against the Cerdonians, Marcionites, Hermogenians, and others, who established various principles, and admitted one author of good and another of evil. For Florinus admitted a single God and principle; but he did not shrink from attributing good and evil to Him. Other heretics, however, acknowledged various principles, that thus they might be able to attribute to each those things which they judged more congruous and agreeable to it: one good, the author and fountain of all good; another just, rigid, implacable, the creator of the universe; a third, eternal matter, or God ruling over matter, whence all evils crept into the world. For the rest, our Maurists well observe that these opinions of Scaliger, Le Moyne, and Tillemont do not go beyond the sphere of conjectures,
Editors' notes and page, col. 332
Footnotes
(32) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 332
Hieronym. in Catalog., cap. 61; Fabric. tom. I, pag. 224.
Jerome, in the Catalogue, ch. 61; Fabricius, vol. I, p. 224.
(printed under page 176)
(33) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 332
Nicephor., H. E. lib. IV, cap. 31.
Nicephorus, Ecclesiastical History book IV, ch. 31.
(printed under page 176)
(34) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 332
Tillemont, Mémoir., tom. III, pag. 106.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, p. 106.
(printed under page 176)
(35) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 332
Euseb., H. E. lib. VI, cap. 22.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 22.
(printed under page 176)
(36) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 332
« Plurimi sane contra hanc impietatem (Marcionis) scripsere. Justinus enim...et Hippolytus optime omnes doctissimeque blasphemiae hujus rabiem confutarunt. » Theodoret., lib. I Haeretic. fabul., cap. 25.
"Very many indeed wrote against this impiety (Marcion's). For Justin ... and Hippolytus all refuted the madness of this blasphemy excellently and most learnedly." Theodoret, Compendium of Heretical Fables book I, ch. 25.
(printed under page 176)
(37) ‹anchor: le Moynio› · call in col 332
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, tom. II, pag. 1117 et seq.
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, vol. II, p. 1117 ff.
(printed under page 176)
(38) ‹anchor: non reformidabat› · call in col 332
Euseb. H. E. lib. V, cap. 20.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book V, ch. 20.
(printed under page 176)
(39) ‹anchor: Maurini nostri› · call in col 332
Hist. littér. de la France, tom. I, pag. 386.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, p. 386.
(printed under page 176)
Page
- running head: SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A scilicet, de quo; B montio videtur, etiam; C rasse hunc librum.; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: scilicet, de quo
excedere, idque duntaxat certum omnino esse, lucubrationes contra Marcionem, et de bono, ac unde malum, pro duobus distinctis operibus haberi debere partim ob diversos titulos, partim etiam ex testimoniis Eusebii ac Hieronymi, atque ipsa tabula Graeca suffragante.
and that this alone is altogether certain, that the lucubrations Against Marcion, and On the Good, and Whence Evil, ought to be held for two distinct works, partly on account of the different titles, partly also from the testimonies of Eusebius and Jerome, and with the Greek table itself supporting it.
Eadem tabula Graeca exhibet nobis sequentem operum Hippolyti titulum, Χρονικῶν πρὸς Ἕλληνας καὶ πρὸς Πλάτωνα, ἢ καὶ περὶ τοῦ παντός, Liber chronicorum contra gentes, et contra Platonem, seu de universo. De tractatu S. Hippolyti contra Platonem, seu De universo, paulo superius articulo 4 cap. 2 disseruimus. Hic solummodo adnotandum, quod doctissimus Scaliger arbitratus fuerit, cum quibusdam aliis, dividendum esse hunc titulum et ex eo plura diversa opera esse colligenda. Verum aliis longe verisimilius videtur, hunc titulum unum duntaxat S. Hippolyti scriptum designare, in quo sanctus martyr et episcopus noster aevi sui morem secutus falso jactatam ethnicorum antiquitatem, Platonisque de mundi aeternitate speciosa dogmata refutanda suscepit.
The same Greek table exhibits to us the following title of the works of Hippolytus, Χρονικῶν πρὸς Ἕλληνας καὶ πρὸς Πλάτωνα, ἢ καὶ περὶ τοῦ παντός, Book of Chronicles against the Nations, and against Plato, or On the Universe. Concerning the treatise of Saint Hippolytus Against Plato, or On the Universe, we discoursed a little above in article 4 of chapter 2. Here it is only to be noted that the most learned Scaliger thought, with certain others, that this title ought to be divided and that from it several different works ought to be gathered. Yet to others it seems far more probable that this title designates only a single writing of Saint Hippolytus, in which our saintly martyr and bishop, following the custom of his age, undertook to refute the falsely boasted antiquity of the heathens and the specious dogmas of Plato concerning the eternity of the world.
ARTICULUS III.
Article 3.
DE HOMILIIS ET EPISTOLIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
On the Homilies and Epistles of Saint Hippolytus.
§ I. Homiliae.
Section 1. Homilies.
Praeter homiliam S. Hippolyti in Theophaniam, de qua supra disseruimus, alios etiam sermones sanctus noster composuisse fertur, nimirum sermonem De resurrectione et incorruptione, De theologia, id est Deitate, in Dominicam Paschae, in Elcanam, et Annam matrem Samuelis. Ex duobus brevibus fragmentis hujus sermonis, quae Theodoretus refert atque conservavit, intelligimus quod sanctus Hippolytus hoc in sermone pro scopo habuerit, ut ostenderet Christum ex
Besides the homily of Saint Hippolytus on the Theophany, concerning which we discoursed above, our saint is reported to have composed other sermons also, namely a sermon On the Resurrection and Incorruption, On Theology, that is the Deity, on Easter Sunday, on Elcana, and Anna the mother of Samuel. From two brief fragments of this sermon, which Theodoret reports and has preserved, we understand that Saint Hippolytus in this sermon had for his aim to show that Christ descended from
Editors' notes and page, col. 333
Footnotes
(40) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 333
Scaliger in Canonem paschalem, lib. VII De emendat. tempor.; Canisius pag. 15 Lect. antiq.
Scaliger on the Paschal Canon, book VII De emendatione temporum; Canisius, p. 15 of the Lectiones antiquae.
(printed under page 177)
(41) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 333
Hist. littér. de la France, tom. I. pag. 389; le Moyne, Var. sacra, tom. II, pag. 1078; Canis., ibid.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, p. 389; Le Moyne, Varia sacra, vol. II, p. 1078; Canisius, ibid.
(printed under page 177)
(42) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 333
Secutus est sanctus martyr et episcopus exemplum SS. Clementis Alexandrini coaetanei, et Caii sui condiscipuli et aliorum, qui similes ediderunt tractatus ad refutandam deorum gentilium antiquitatem. Caeterum dubitat cl. Remi Ceillier, num ultima verba, scilicet ad Graecos, relationem habeant ad Chronicon. In laterculo quidem legitur Χρονικῶν πρὸς Ἕλληνας. De hoc Chronico videsis infra, col. 343.
The holy martyr and bishop followed the example of St Clement of Alexandria, his contemporary, and of Caius his fellow pupil and others, who published similar treatises to refute the antiquity of the gentile gods. But the distinguished Remi Ceillier doubts whether the last words, namely to the Greeks, refer to the Chronicle. On the list, indeed, there is read Of chronicles, to the Greeks. On this Chronicle see below, col. 343.
(printed under page 177)
(43) ‹anchor: De resurrectione› · call in col 333
Vide art. 2 hujus capitis.
See art. 2 of this chapter.
(printed under page 177)
(44) ‹anchor: id est Deitate› · call in col 333
Exstat haec homilia in Actis concilii Lateranensis sub Martino I anno 649 celebrati, secretar. 5, pag. 287, tom. VII, edit. Veneto-Labb.; apud Fabric. tom. I Opp. S. Hippol., pag. 235, et apud Gallandium tom. II Vet. Patr. Biblioth., pag. 495.
This homily survives in the Acts of the Lateran council held under Martin I in 649, session 5, p. 287, vol. VII of the Venice edition of Labbe; in Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of St Hippolytus, p. 235, and in Gallandi, vol. II of the Bibliotheca veterum Patrum, p. 495.
(printed under page 177)
(45) ‹anchor: in Dominicam Paschae› · call in col 333
Iidem in Act. concil. Later. I, l. c., pag. 195, et apud Fabric., loc. cit., pag. 281; Galland., loc. cit
The same, in the Acts of the first Lateran council, at the place cited, p. 195, and in Fabricius, at the place cited, p. 281; Gallandi, at the place cited.
(printed under page 177)
(46) ‹anchor: Theodoretus› · call in col 333
Theodoret., dialog. 1 cui titulus: Ἄτρεπτος. Opp. tom. IV, pag. 36, et apud eumdem dialog. 2 qui Ἀσύγχυτος inscribitur. Ibid. pag. 88, et apud Fabric. loc. cit. pag. 266, et apud Galland. l. c. pag. 496.
Theodoret, dialogue 1, entitled The Immutable, Works vol. IV, p. 36; and in the same, dialogue 2, entitled The Unconfused, ibid. p. 88; and in Fabricius, at the place cited, p. 266; and in Gallandi, at the place cited, p. 496.
(printed under page 177)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPO
- marginal letters: A excedere, idque duntaxat; B lum et ex eo; C schae, in Elcanam,; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: excedere, idque duntaxat
Davide descendisse eodemque tempore simul fuisse regem et sacerdotem, ac Verbum Dei revera incarnatum in utero beatae Virginis Mariae. Orationem in illud, Dominus pascit me, apud eumdem Theodoretum dialogo 1, pag. 36. Paulo superius jam retulimus S. Hippolyti sermones in magnum Canticum, in exordium prophetiae Isaiae, in Danielem prophetam duas homilias, de distributione talentorum, de duobus latronibus. Atque ibidem observavimus, quod hae homiliae fortasse pars quaedam fuerint Commentariorum hujus sancti Patris in Canticum canticorum, in Isaiam et in Evangelium S. Matthaei.
David and at the same time was together king and priest, and the Word of God truly incarnate in the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary. An oration on that text, The Lord feeds me (Ps. 22:1), is in the same Theodoret, dialogue 1, page 36. A little above we have already related the sermons of Saint Hippolytus on the great Canticle, on the beginning of the prophecy of Isaias, two homilies on the prophet Daniel, on the distribution of the talents, on the two thieves. And in the same place we observed that these homilies were perhaps a certain part of the Commentaries of this holy Father on the Canticle of Canticles, on Isaias, and on the Gospel of Saint Matthew.
Teste divo Hieronymo sanctus Hippolytus in ecclesia homiliam in laudem Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi habuit, inter auditores praesente ipso Origene. Et προσομιλίαν (verba sunt divi Hieronymi) de laude Domini Salvatoris, in qua praesente Origene se loqui in ecclesia significat. Sed hodie nihil amplius de hac homilia exstat.
On the testimony of Saint Jerome, Saint Hippolytus delivered in the church a homily in praise of our Saviour Jesus Christ, with Origen himself present among the hearers. And a homily (the words are Saint Jerome's) on the praise of the Lord the Saviour, in which he signifies that he is speaking in the church with Origen present. But today nothing more of this homily is extant.
Huc etiam referimus S. Hippolyti Προτρεπτικὸν πρὸς Σεβήρειναν, Exhortationem ad Severinam. Quaenam vero sit illa Severina, cui scripsit exhortationem Hippolytus, in diversa abeunt sensa viri eruditi. Scaliger ait : Scripserat epistolam ad quamdam reginam, ut refert Theodoretus. Ego non assero, hanc esse Severinam, quae illi regina dicitur, sed neque pertendam, si quis ita existimet. Le Moynius censet, intelligendam esse Severam Augustam Philippi imperatoris conjugem, quam et litteris compellavit Origenes, atque propterea legendum esse Προτρεπτικὸς πρὸς Σεβῆραναυ, Protrepticos ad Severam Au, id est, Augustam, et non Σεβήρειναν, Severinam. Ex Theodoreto quidem audivimus ad quamdam reginam scripsisse Hippolytum.
Hither also we refer Saint Hippolytus's Προτρεπτικὸν πρὸς Σεβήρειναν, Exhortation to Severina. Now as to who that Severina may be, to whom Hippolytus wrote the exhortation, learned men depart into diverse opinions. Scaliger says: He had written an epistle to a certain queen, as Theodoret reports. I do not assert that this is Severina, who is called queen by him, but neither will I contend against it, if anyone should think so. Le Moyne considers that Severa Augusta, wife of the Emperor Philip, is to be understood, whom Origen also addressed by letters, and that on that account there should be read Προτρεπτικὸς πρὸς Σεβῆραναυ, Protreptics to Severa Au, that is, Augusta, and not Σεβήρειναν, Severina. From Theodoret indeed we have heard that Hippolytus wrote to a certain queen.
Editors' notes and page, col. 334
Footnotes
(47) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 334
Vide art. 1 hujus capitis. Tria fragmenta ex sermone S. Hippolyti in magnum Canticum refert Theodoretus dialog. 2, pag. 88, quae habentur apud Fabric., l. c., pag. 269; et Galland., loc. c., pag. 497.
See art. 1 of this chapter. Theodoret, dialogue 2, p. 88, gives three fragments from St Hippolytus's sermon on the great Song, which are found in Fabricius, at the place cited, p. 269, and Gallandi, at the place cited, p. 497.
(printed under page 177)
(48) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 334
Ex secunda oratione in Danielem habetur fragmentum apud Eustratium presbyterum CP. in tractatu « adversus eos, qui dicunt animas statim atque e corpore solutae sunt, non operari, » etc., cap. 19.
From the second oration on Daniel a fragment is found in Eustratius, presbyter of Constantinople, in the treatise "against those who say that souls, as soon as they are freed from the body, do not act," etc., ch. 19.
(printed under page 177)
(49) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 334
Quatuor hos tractatus, quos Theodoretus vocat sermones, statuimus inter Commentarios S. Hippolyti, secuti in hoc exemplum S. Hieronymi, qui quosdam ex his abs Theodoreto citatos sermones in numero Commentariorum recenset, videlicet Commentarios in Psalmos, in Isaiam, in Canticum canticorum, in S. Matthaeum. Interim nihil impedit, ut bene observat cl. Ceillier tom. II Hist. génér. des auteurs, pag. 332, quominus S. Hippolytus et homilias et Commentarios in eumdem librum, seu in quasdam librorum eorumdem partes confecerit.
These four treatises, which Theodoret calls sermons, we have placed among St Hippolytus's Commentaries, following in this the example of St Jerome, who counts some of these sermons cited by Theodoret among the Commentaries, namely the Commentaries on the Psalms, on Isaiah, on the Song of Songs, on St Matthew. Meanwhile nothing prevents, as the distinguished Ceillier well observes (Histoire générale des auteurs, vol. II, p. 332), St Hippolytus from having composed both homilies and Commentaries on the same book, or on certain parts of the same books.
(printed under page 177)
(50) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 334
S. Hieronym., De vir. illustr., cap. 61.
St Jerome, On Illustrious Men, ch. 61.
(printed under page 177)
(51) ‹anchor: Scaliger ait› · call in col 334
Scaliger apud Fabric. Opp. S. Hippol. tom. I, p. 87.
Scaliger, in Fabricius, Works of St Hippolytus, vol. I, p. 87.
(printed under page 177)
(52) ‹anchor: Le Moynius› · call in col 334
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, tom. II, pag. 87 et seq.
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, vol. II, p. 87 ff.
(printed under page 177)
(53) ‹anchor: Origenes› · call in col 334
Euseb., H. E. lib. VI, cap. 35, ait: « Exstat et Origenis epistola ad Philippum imperatorem, et alia ad Severam Philippi uxorem. »
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 35, says: "There survives also a letter of Origen to the emperor Philip, and another to Severa, Philip's wife."
(printed under page 177)
(54) ‹anchor: audivimus› · call in col 334
« Ejusdem Hippolyti ad reginam quamdam epistola. » Theodoret., dialog. 2, pag. 88; dialog. 3, pag. 155.
"A letter of the same Hippolytus to a certain queen." Theodoret, dialogue 2, p. 88; dialogue 3, p. 155.
(printed under page 177)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 334
- marginal letters: A Davide descendisse eodemque; B Jesu Christi habuit,; C litteris compellavit Origenes,; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin, with Greek words printed (προσομιλίαν; the Protrepticus titles); editors' matter: Davide descendisse eodemque; Hip- split at column break
Sed nobis, inquit cl. Samuel Basnagius, tamen non placet audax illa crisis, quae, nulla cogente necessitate, veteres mutat inscriptiones. Severinam, non Severam habet marmor Hippolyti. Severa vero, non Severina, Philippo uxor fuit. Neque in marmore vestigii est aliquid, quo Augustea dignitate ornatam fuisse Severinam colligamus, quod tamen oblivioni datum non fuisset. Incertum etiam, an ad Philippi imperium usque, annos Hippolytus suos extenderit. Addunt insuper Maurini nostri, etiamsi Theodoretus citet epistolam, abs Hippolyto ad reginam quamdam perscriptam, ex hoc non sequi, quod per eam epistolam illa intelligenda sit, quae ad Severinam exarata fuit. Sanctus enim episcopus noster ad plures personas, sive reginas, sive alias, exaravit litteras. Siquidem inter ejus scripta, quae sanctus Alexander Hierosolymitanus episcopus indefessa cura pro locupletanda sua bibliotheca collegerat, mentio fit de litteris S. Hippolyti, tanquam in fasciculum collectis. Adde quod nullum argumentum habeatur, ex quo colligi possit sanctum nostrum ultra imperium Severi Alexandri vitam protendisse. Quapropter cl. Caveus ait : Si Hippolyti aetatem eousque protrahere durius videatur, ad Alexandri Severi sororem, aut ex ejus familia aliquam epistola haec non male referri potest. Doctissimus Jacobus Basnagius, qui hanc difficultatem uberius explicandam suscepit, longe abfuit ut eam solveret, sed potius auxit, dum statuit ad Zenobiam reginam Palmyrae eam, de qua agimus, direxisse epistolam. Quae profecto opinio non solum nullo nititur argumento, sed omni etiam verisimilitudine caret. Ut enim probabilitatis speciem haberet, necesse foret ut S. Hippolytus, D. Irenaei anno 202 defuncti discipulus, vitam protraxisset usque ad imperium Aureliani imperatoris, ann. sc. 270, quo nimirum tempore Zenobia regnare coepit. Quinimo vel supponendum esset, Zenobiam nomen etiam Severinae gessisse, vel omnino rejicienda foret inscriptio, ut falsa, quae hoc nomine appellat
wrote to a certain queen. But to us, says the illustrious Samuel Basnage, that bold criticism nevertheless does not please, which, with no compelling necessity, changes the ancient inscriptions. The marble of Hippolytus has Severina, not Severa. Moreover Severa, not Severina, was wife to Philip. Nor is there any trace on the marble whereby we may gather that Severina was adorned with the Augustan dignity, which nevertheless would not have been given to oblivion. It is uncertain also whether Hippolytus extended his years down to the reign of Philip. Our Maurists add in addition that, even if Theodoret cites an epistle written by Hippolytus to a certain queen, it does not follow from this that by that epistle is to be understood the one which was penned to Severina. For our saintly bishop penned letters to several persons, whether queens or others. Since indeed among his writings, which Saint Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem, had collected with untiring care for enriching his library, mention is made of the letters of Saint Hippolytus, as collected into a bundle. Add that there is no argument from which it can be gathered that our saint prolonged his life beyond the reign of Severus Alexander. Wherefore the illustrious Cave says: If to protract the age of Hippolytus so far should seem too harsh, this epistle can not badly be referred to the sister of Alexander Severus, or to someone from his family. The most learned Jacques Basnage, who undertook to explain this difficulty more fully, was far from solving it, but rather increased it, when he established that he directed the epistle of which we are treating to Zenobia, queen of Palmyra. Which opinion assuredly not only rests on no argument, but also lacks all probability. For in order that it might have a semblance of probability, it would be necessary that Saint Hippolytus, a disciple of Saint Irenaeus who died in the year 202, should have protracted his life down to the reign of the Emperor Aurelian, namely the year 270, at which time of course Zenobia began to reign. Nay more, either it would have to be supposed that Zenobia bore the name of Severina also, or the inscription would have to be altogether rejected as false, which calls by this name
Editors' notes and page, col. 335
Footnotes
(55) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 335
Samuel Basnage, Annal. polit. eccles., tom. II, pag. 289, ad ann. 222.
Samuel Basnage, Annales politico-ecclesiastici, vol. II, p. 289, at the year 222.
(printed under page 178)
(56) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 335
Histoire littéraire de la France, tom. I, p. 389 et seq.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, p. 389 ff.
(printed under page 178)
(57) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 335
Euseb., H. E. lib. VI, cap. 20.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 20.
(printed under page 178)
(58) ‹anchor: cl. Caveus› · call in col 335
Cave, Hist. litterar., tom. I, pag. 105.
Cave, Historia litteraria, vol. I, p. 105.
(printed under page 178)
(59) ‹anchor: Jacobus Basnagius› · call in col 335
Jac. Basnage, apud Canis. Lect. antiq., tom. I, pag. 8.
Jacques Basnage, in Canisius, Lectiones antiquae, vol. I, p. 8.
(printed under page 178)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A polytum. Sed nobis,; B alias, exaravit litteras.; C direxisse epistolam. Quae; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: polytum. Sed nobis,; polytum split from previous column
eam personam, cui epistola illa perscripta fuit. Annalium parens Caesar Baronius Juliam Mamaeam intelligendam esse arbitratur. Hae virorum doctorum sententiae circa inscriptionem hujus epistolae. Caeterum ex hac epistola, quae pariter aetatem nostram non tulit, duo nobis fragmenta Theodoretus dialogo secundo et tertio asservavit, legenda apud Gallandium.
that person to whom that epistle was written. The father of the Annals, Caesar Baronius, thinks that Julia Mamaea is to be understood. These are the opinions of learned men concerning the inscription of this epistle. For the rest, from this epistle, which likewise has not borne down to our age, Theodoret in his second and third dialogues has preserved two fragments for us, to be read in Gallandi.
§ II. Epistolae S. Hippolyti.
Section 2. Epistles of Saint Hippolytus.
Eusebius testatur se multas legisse S. Hippolyti litteras in Bibliotheca ab Alexandro Hierosolymorum episcopo ibidem adornata. Sed praeter illam ad Severinam in laterculo notatam, et a Theodoreto laudatam, velut ad reginam quamdam perscriptam, de qua paulo ante disseruimus, de reliquis altum apud antiquos scriptores silentium. Fabricius refert aliquem locum epistolae synodalis Joannis Antiocheni ad Mennam Alexandrinum anno Christi 968 scriptae, ubi citatur epistola sancti Hippolyti ad sanctum Dionysium Cypriae episcopum; ex qua Joannes Antiochenus adducit locum ad probandam unicam in Christo naturam post incarnationem. Verum Joannes Antiochenus parvae ad faciendam fidem auctoritatis est vir; nec desunt argumenta, ex quibus credibile fit, ipsum Joannem hujus epistolae, atque loci, in quo aperte haeresis Eutychiana continetur, auctorem esse atque consarcinatorem. Nam praeterquam quod episcopus Cypriae nomine Dionysius saeculo sancti Hippolyti nullibi reperiatur, doctrina etiam ex hac epistola allegata sententiis hujus sancti martyris e diametro opposita invenitur. Hic enim in pluribus operum suorum locis paulo inferius proferendis duas naturas in Jesu Christo post incarnationem diserte agnoscit. Quid quod mala fides Joannis Antiocheni manifeste appareat ex eodem loco, dum allegat quemdam ex S. Athanasii ad imperatorem Jovianum epistola locum, qui tamen nullibi apud Athanasium reperitur. Annon hoc factum eumdem in aliis SS. antiquorum Patrum locis allegandis, quorum
Eusebius testifies that he read many letters of Saint Hippolytus in the Library prepared in the same place by Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem. But besides that to Severina noted in the list, and praised by Theodoret as written to a certain queen, concerning which we discoursed a little before, concerning the rest there is deep silence among ancient writers. Fabricius reports a certain passage of a synodal epistle of John of Antioch to Mennas of Alexandria written in the year of Christ 968, where an epistle of Saint Hippolytus to Saint Dionysius, bishop of Cyprus, is cited; from which John of Antioch adduces a passage to prove a single nature in Christ after the incarnation. Yet John of Antioch is a man of small authority for establishing credit; nor are arguments wanting from which it becomes credible that John himself is the author and patcher together of this epistle, and of the passage in which the Eutychian heresy is openly contained. For besides the fact that a bishop of Cyprus by the name of Dionysius is nowhere found in the century of Saint Hippolytus, the doctrine also alleged from this epistle is found to be diametrically opposed to the opinions of this holy martyr. For he in several passages of his works to be brought forward a little below expressly acknowledges two natures in Jesus Christ after the incarnation. What of the fact that the bad faith of John of Antioch manifestly appears from the same passage, while he alleges a certain passage from the epistle of Saint Athanasius to the Emperor Jovian, which nevertheless is nowhere found in Athanasius? Must not this fact render the same man suspected in alleging other passages of the holy ancient Fathers, whose
Editors' notes and page, col. 336
Footnotes
(60) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 336
Baron. ad ann. 229, num. 10.
Baronius, at the year 229, no. 10.
(printed under page 178)
(61) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 336
Galland., tom. II Bibl. PP., pag. 499.
Gallandi, vol. II of the Bibliotheca Patrum, p. 499.
(printed under page 178)
(62) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 336
Euseb., H. E. lib. VI, cap 20.
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History book VI, ch. 20.
(printed under page 178)
(63) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 336
Fabric., S. Hippolyt. Opp. tom. II, pag. 32.
Fabricius, Works of St Hippolytus, vol. II, p. 32.
(printed under page 178)
(64) ‹anchor: atque consarcinatorem› · call in col 336
Ut lectores facilius judicium ferre possint, num loca abs Joanne Antiocheno divo Hippolyto nostro ascripta, huic magno episcopo sint digna, vel potius a sectario haereseos Eutychianae sint fabricata, tria illius loca hic afferre integra operae pretium esse duximus. « S. Hippolytus Romanus episcopus in tractatu adversus eos qui impugnant incarnationem Verbi Dei ob consubstantialitatem ejus cum Patre: « Virgo, ait, cum peperit corpus, Verbum quoque peperit, et idcirco est Deipara; Judaei quoque, cum crucifixerunt corpus, crucifixerunt Deum Verbum; neque distinctio ulla inter Verbum et corpus hominis occurrit in divinis Scripturis, sed ipse est natura una, persona una, suppositum unum, operatio una; Verbum Deus, Verbum homo, quemadmodum erat. » Item in tractatu de unione corporis Christi et ejus divinitatis profitetur « illum, qui creatus, increatum esse per unionem; et illum increatum per eamdem unionem creatum fieri, quandoquidem natura una ex duabus illis integris partibus constat. » Idem quoque in epistola ad Dionysium episcopum Cypri sic ait: « Dum confitentur naturas duas, coguntur unum adorare, et alterum non adorant; in eo qui divinus est baptizantur, in eo qui homo est non baptizantur. Porro cum in nomine Christi baptizemur, naturam unam confitemur, divinitatem impassibilem, et corpus passibile, ut baptismus noster sit in Deo, et in morte Domini. » Joann. Antiochen., Epist. synodic. ad Mennam, apud Euseb. Renaudot., in Hist. patriarch. Alex., pag. 360.
So that readers may more easily judge whether the passages ascribed by John of Antioch to our divine Hippolytus are worthy of this great bishop, or rather were fabricated by a partisan of the Eutychian heresy, we have thought it worth while to give three of them here in full. "St Hippolytus, bishop of Rome, in the treatise against those who attack the incarnation of the Word of God on account of his consubstantiality with the Father: 'The Virgin,' he says, 'when she bore the body, bore the Word also, and therefore she is Mother of God; the Jews too, when they crucified the body, crucified God the Word; nor does any distinction between the Word and the body of the man occur in the divine Scriptures, but he is one nature, one person, one suppositum, one operation; the Word God, the Word man, as he was.' Likewise in the treatise on the union of Christ's body and his divinity he professes 'that he who was created is uncreated through the union; and that he who is uncreated becomes created through the same union, since one nature is made up of those two entire parts.' The same also, in the letter to Dionysius, bishop of Cyprus, speaks thus: 'While they confess two natures, they are forced to adore the one and they do not adore the other; they are baptized into him who is divine, they are not baptized into him who is man. But since we are baptized in the name of Christ, we confess one nature, the impassible divinity and the passible body, so that our baptism may be in God and in the death of the Lord.'" John of Antioch, synodical letter to Menas, in Eusèbe Renaudot, Historia patriarcharum Alexandrinorum, p. 360.
(printed under page 178)
(65) ‹anchor: reperitur› · call in col 336
Iterum etiam ex epistola ad Jovianum imperatorem in qua dicit Athanasius: « Unum dicere oportet, et confiteri naturam unam, et personam unam Verbi incarnati, qui homo factus, humanitatem per- (continues)
Again, too, from the letter to the emperor Jovian, in which Athanasius says: "One must say, and confess, one nature and one person of the incarnate Word, who, having become man, [the] humanity through- (continues)
(printed under page 178)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A eam personam, cui; B altum apud antiquos; C allegata sententiis hujus; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: eam personam, cui
opera deperdita fuere, suspectum reddere debet? Iisdem rationum momentis convicti alia duo loca ab eodem adducta rejicimus. Primus locus ex quodam tractatu, in quo juxta Joannem Antiochenum sanctus Hippolytus eos impugnabat, qui ob consubstantialitatem Verbi divini cum Patre suo, mysterium Incarnationis inficiabantur, desumptus est; et secundum ex alio opere deprompsit, quod ille eidem sancto Patri ascripsit hoc sub titulo : De unione corporis Jesu Christi cum ejus divinitate. Duo haec loca haud minus haeresin Eutychianam redolent; libri quoque, unde petita esse supponitur, toti etiam antiquitati omnino ignoti sunt. Notandum praeterea, quod ea loca, quae abs Joanne Antiocheno ex S. Hippolyti nostri epistola ad Dionysium episcopum Cypri afferuntur, Graece exstent in epistola Julio Romano pontifici tributa ad Dionysium Alexandrinum, edita a celeberrimo Muratorio in Anecdotis Graecis, pag. 343. Unde cl. Fabricius non sine fundamento arbitratur, in locis, quae pag. 32 tom. II Opp. Hippolyti Latine ex V. C. Eusebii Renaudotii Historia patriarcharum Alexandrinorum exscripsit, pro Hippolyto Romano legendum esse Julius Romanus.
works have been lost? Convinced by the same weight of reasons, we reject two other passages adduced by the same man. The first passage is taken from a certain treatise in which according to John of Antioch Saint Hippolytus attacked those who, on account of the consubstantiality of the divine Word with His Father, denied the mystery of the Incarnation; and the second he drew from another work, which he ascribed to the same holy Father under this title: On the Union of the Body of Jesus Christ with His Divinity. These two passages savour no less of the Eutychian heresy; the books also, whence they are supposed to have been drawn, are altogether unknown to all antiquity as well. It is to be noted besides that those passages which are brought forward by John of Antioch from the epistle of our Saint Hippolytus to Dionysius, bishop of Cyprus, are extant in Greek in an epistle attributed to Julius, Roman pontiff, to Dionysius of Alexandria, published by the most celebrated Muratori in his Anecdota Graeca, page 343. Whence the illustrious Fabricius not without foundation thinks that in the passages which on page 32 of tome II of the Works of Hippolytus he transcribed in Latin from the History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria of the most distinguished Eusebius Renaudot, for Hippolytus of Rome there should be read Julius of Rome.
§ III. Tractatus S. Hippolyti de jejunio Sabbati, de communione Eucharistiae, et de virgine Corinthiaca, etc.
§ III. Treatises of Saint Hippolytus on the Fast of the Sabbath, on the Communion of the Eucharist, and on the Corinthian Virgin, etc.
Hieronymus in epistola ad Lucinium testatur sanctum Hippolytum nostrum de Sabbato, utrum jejunandum sit, et de Eucharistia, an accipienda quotidie, disertissime scripsisse. In codice mss. Graeco 193 bibliothecae Coislinianae refertur fragmentum S. Hippolyti contra fatum teste Montfauconio pag. 245. Verum utrum sanctus episcopus speciales tractatus circa illa disciplinae puncta, et de fato composuerit, vel in aliis suis operibus, v. gr., in tractatu De traditione apostolorum, haec duntaxat perstrinxerit, determinatu admodum difficile est.
Jerome in his epistle to Lucinius testifies that our Saint Hippolytus wrote most eloquently on the Sabbath, whether one must fast, and on the Eucharist, whether it is to be received daily. In the Greek manuscript codex 193 of the Coislin library there is reported a fragment of Saint Hippolytus Against Fate, as Montfaucon testifies on page 245. Yet whether the saintly bishop composed special treatises concerning those points of discipline and on fate, or in his other works, for example in the treatise On the Tradition of the Apostles, merely touched upon these things, is very difficult to determine.
Editors' notes and page, col. 337
Footnotes
(66) ‹anchor: cl. Fabricius› · call in col 337
Fabric., Opp. S. Hippolyti, tom. II, Praefat. p. 2.
Fabricius, Works of St Hippolytus, vol. II, Preface, p. 2.
(printed under page 179)
(67) ‹anchor: ad Lucinium› · call in col 337
Hieronym., epist. ad Lucinium alias 28, nunc 71 edit. Venet. in-4°, tom. I, pag. 434, num. 6, ubi sic ait: « De Sabbato quod quaeris, utrum jejunandum sit; et de Eucharistia, an accipienda quotidie, quod Romana Ecclesia et Hispaniae observare perhibentur, scripsit quidem et Hippolytus vir disertissimus. »
Jerome, letter to Lucinius, formerly 28, now 71 in the Venice quarto edition, vol. I, p. 434, no. 6, where he says: "As to what you ask about the Sabbath, whether one should fast on it, and about the Eucharist, whether it should be received daily, as the Roman Church and the Spains are said to observe: Hippolytus too, a most eloquent man, wrote on it."
(printed under page 179)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A opera deperdita fuere,; B Cypri afferuntur, Graece; C utrum jejunandum sit,; D Hic nolumus repetere,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: opera deperdita fuere,; diffi- and duo- split at column breaks; two full-width heading lines (CAPUT IV... and DE OPERIBUS S. HIPPOLYT...) above ARTICULUS I cut off at right edge, not set
- other: the word difficile was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); duo-bus (col 337 below the band) stands whole in col 338's part, which carries col 337's text below the CAPUT IV band in reading order
Sic etiam antiquitatis monumenta nobis sat luminis non subministrant, ex quo colligere certo liceret, utrum sanctus Hippolytus dedita opera De numero impari scripserit, vel pertractando solum aliud argumentum, de illo velut per transennam disseruerit. Utut sit, sanctus Hieronymus nostrum sanctum episcopum et martyrem inter assertores numeri imparis recenset hoc modo : « Nunc enumerandum mihi est, qui ecclesiasticorum de impari numero disputarint, Clemens, Hippolytus, Origenes, Dionysius, Eusebius, Didymus, nostrorumque Tertullianus, Cyprianus, Victorinus Lactantius, Hilarius. »
So also the monuments of antiquity do not supply us with enough light from which one might gather with certainty whether Saint Hippolytus wrote on purpose On the Odd Number, or in treating only another subject discoursed of it as it were in passing. However it may be, Saint Jerome reckons our saintly bishop and martyr among the maintainers of the odd number in this manner: "Now I must enumerate who of the ecclesiastical writers have disputed concerning the odd number: Clement, Hippolytus, Origen, Dionysius, Eusebius, Didymus, and of ours Tertullian, Cyprian, Victorinus, Lactantius, Hilary."
Leontius Byzantinus allegat sub nomine S. Hippolyti tractatum De benedictionibus Balaam. Verum hic auctor in referendis antiquorum testimoniis adeo infidelis est, ut parum fidei promereatur. Fieri nihilominus potuit, ut sanctus Hippolytus pro materia seu argumento alicujus suorum tractatuum seu homiliarum juxta consuetudinem suam has benedictiones selegerit, ex quibus Leontius ea, quae allegavit, deprompserat.
Leontius of Byzantium alleges under the name of Saint Hippolytus a treatise On the Blessings of Balaam. Yet this author in reporting the testimonies of the ancients is so unfaithful that he deserves little credit. Nevertheless it could have happened that Saint Hippolytus according to his custom selected these blessings for the subject or argument of one of his treatises or homilies, from which Leontius had drawn the things which he alleged.
Denique Palladius in Historia sua Lausiaca, cap. 148, ex sancto Hippolyto, quem apostolorum coaetaneum vocat, refert narrationem de virgine quadam Corinthiaca, a judice gentili in lupanar tradita ut corrumperetur, quam Magistrianus adolescens Christianus simulans se velle cum ea incaste versari, e lupanari mutatis vestibus, et ab omni corruptione pia fraude liberavit, sequenti autem die re cognita ad bestias a judice damnatus Magistrianus martyrio coronatus fuit. Meminit hujus virginis et Nicephorus H. E. lib. VII, cap. 13, sed paucis; neque uspiam eam Corinthiacam esse dictitat; historiam idem de Magistriano persequitur idem Nicephorus : utramque narrationem apud Fabricium et Gallandium impressam legere poteris.
Finally Palladius in his Lausiac History, chapter 148, from Saint Hippolytus, whom he calls a contemporary of the apostles, reports a narrative concerning a certain Corinthian virgin, handed over by a heathen judge into a brothel that she might be corrupted, whom Magistrianus, a Christian youth, pretending that he wished to consort unchastely with her, freed from the brothel by changing garments and from all corruption by a pious fraud; and on the following day, the matter having become known, Magistrianus, condemned by the judge to the beasts, was crowned with martyrdom. Nicephorus also makes mention of this virgin in his Ecclesiastical History, book VII, chapter 13, but in few words; nor does he anywhere say that she was a Corinthian; the same Nicephorus likewise pursues the history concerning Magistrianus: you will be able to read either narrative printed in Fabricius and Gallandi.
CAPUT IV.
CHAPTER IV.
DE OPERIBUS S. HIPPOLYTO SUPPOSITIS.
ON THE WORKS FALSELY ATTRIBUTED TO ST HIPPOLYTUS.
ARTICULUS I.
ARTICLE I.
DE OPERE S. HIPPOLYTO FALSO ASCRIPTO « DE CONSUMMATIONE MUNDI, DE ANTICHRISTO, AC DE SECUNDO CHRISTI ADVENTU. »
On the Work Falsely Ascribed to Saint Hippolytus, On the Consummation of the World, on Antichrist, and on the Second Coming of Christ.
Hic nolumus repetere, quae paulo supra de duobus tractatibus, et de epistola sub nomine S. Hippolyti a Joanne Antiocheno allegata disseruimus; sed crisin operum eidem suppositorum illico ab eo opere inchoamus, cujus titulus : De consummatione mundi, de Antichristo, et de secundo Christi adventu.
Here we do not wish to repeat what we have discoursed a little above concerning the two treatises, and concerning the epistle alleged under the name of Saint Hippolytus by John of Antioch; but we immediately begin the criticism of the works falsely attributed to him from that work whose title is: On the Consummation of the World, on Antichrist, and on the Second Coming of Christ.
Editors' notes and page, col. 338
Footnotes
(68) ‹anchor: Hilarius› · call in col 338
Hieronym., epist. 48 edit. Venet., num. 19, pag. 232, alias 50, ad Pammachium, seu Apologeticus pro libris contra Jovinianum.
Jerome, letter 48 of the Venice edition, no. 19, p. 232, otherwise 50, to Pammachius, or the Apology for the books against Jovinian.
(printed under page 179)
(69) ‹anchor: Leontius Byzantinus› · call in col 338
Leont. Byz., Biblioth. PP. tom. IX, edit. Lugd. p. 682; Canis. Lect. antiq., tom. I, praef. p. 9.
Leontius of Byzantium, Bibliotheca Patrum vol. IX, Lyons edition, p. 682; Canisius, Lectiones antiquae, vol. I, preface, p. 9.
(printed under page 179)
(70) ‹anchor: benedictionibus Balaam› · call in col 338
Graec. mss. in biblioth. Bodlei. habet « De benedictionibus Abraam. »
The Greek manuscript in the Bodleian Library has "On the blessings of Abraham."
(printed under page 179)
(71) ‹anchor: apud Fabricium› · call in col 338
Fabric., Opp. S. Hippolyt. tom. I, pag. 283 et 284.
Fabricius, Works of St Hippolytus, vol. I, pp. 283 and 284.
(printed under page 179)
(72) ‹anchor: et Gallandium› · call in col 338
Galland., Biblioth. PP. tom II, pag. 513 et 514.
Gallandi, Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. II, pp. 513 and 514.
(printed under page 179)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A cile est. Sic; B Verum hic auctor; C omni corruptione pia; D mundi, de Antichristo,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: cile est. Sic; cile and bus split from previous column; two full-width heading lines (...APUT IV. and ...S. HIPPOLYTO SUPPOSITIS.) above bus tractatibus cut off at left edge, not set
Hunc tractatum sub nomine Hippolyti Joannes Picus primus Graece ac Latine Parisiis an. 1557 in lucem dedit cum praefato titulo, qui in capite mss. Graeci Venetiis, unde cl. editor copiam accepit, exstat. Insertus est postmodum hic tractatus Bibliothecae Patrum Parisiensis posterioris editionis tomo XII. Recusa etiam Pici versio Latina Coloniae 1563, in-8, apud Maternum Cholinum, et ad calcem Justini M. Paris. 1575. Et in Bibliothecis Patrum cujuscunque editionis; etiam Graece ac Latine in Auctuario Bibliothecae Patrum Ducaeano Paris. 1624, tom. II. Gallice interpretatus fuit Nicolaus le Clerc, Parisiis 1566 et 1579. Ad calcem insuper tomi I Operum sancti nostri a Fabricio editorum idem tractatus impressus legitur. Observat doctissimus Tillemontius plures viros eruditos ab initio hunc libellum velut genuinum scriptum recepisse, qui tamen sibi imperare non potuere, quominus condemnarent, quod in eo legitur, Joannem evangelistam necdum esse mortuum, quod revera etiam parum dignum esse videtur tanto doctore Ecclesiae, tamque celebri, qui tertio saeculo vixit, atque in genuino libro De Antichristo contrarium etiam diserte testatus est; quapropter et prius, quam verus ille De Antichristo tractatus fuisset repertus, non pauci eum tanquam falsum ac subdititium rejecerunt, ac longe junioris scriptoris illum esse putaverunt. Inter hos agmen ducit Andreas Rivetus qui ita de hoc libello judicat : Exiguus libellus, pretii pene nullius, nec fidei quidem majoris. Auctorem fuisse illitteratum atque indoctum, cum ex ipso Graecae dictionis genere, quod plerumque puerile est, tum ex rei veritate atque pondere apparet. Primam libri sententiam exorditur ab enim, γάρ, quod ne puer quidem in schola faceret. Multas habet de natalibus et vita Antichristi inanes conjecturas. Antichristum non hominem, sed daemonem
This treatise under the name of Hippolytus Jean Picot first brought to light in Greek and Latin at Paris in the year 1557 with the aforesaid title, which is extant at the head of the Greek manuscript at Venice, whence the illustrious editor received a copy. This treatise was afterwards inserted in tome 12 of the later edition of the Paris Bibliotheca Patrum. The Latin version of Picot was also reprinted at Cologne in 1563, in octavo, at the press of Maternus Cholinus, and at the end of Justin Martyr, Paris, 1575. And in the Bibliothecae Patrum of whatever edition; also in Greek and Latin in the Ducaean Auctuarium of the Bibliotheca Patrum, Paris, 1624, tome 2. Nicolas le Clerc translated it into French at Paris in 1566 and 1579. At the end moreover of tome 1 of the Works of our saint edited by Fabricius the same treatise is read in print. The most learned Tillemont observes that several learned men from the beginning received this little book as a genuine writing, who nevertheless could not restrain themselves from condemning what is read in it, that John the Evangelist is not yet dead, which in truth also seems little worthy of so great and so celebrated a doctor of the Church, who lived in the third century, and in his genuine book On Antichrist also expressly testified the contrary; wherefore even before that true treatise On Antichrist had been found, not a few rejected it as false and spurious, and thought it to be of a much younger writer. Among these Andrew Rivet leads the column, who judges thus of this little book: A slender little book, of almost no value, nor indeed of greater credit. That the author was illiterate and unlearned appears both from the very style of the Greek diction, which for the most part is childish, and from the truth and weight of the matter. He begins the first sentence of the book with for, γάρ, which not even a boy in school would do. He has many empty conjectures concerning the birth and life of Antichrist. That Antichrist will not be a man, but a demon
Editors' notes and page, col. 339
Footnotes
(73) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 339
Fuit is classium inquisitoriarum Parisiensis senatus primum praefectus, postea canonicus Parisiensis. Nomen ejus Latinum est Picus, quod Gallice quidam eruditi designarunt per Pic. Unde cl. Dupin erronee Picum Mirandulanum editorem arbitratus est Biblioth. auctor. tom. I, pag. 177 Lat., Colon. Sed verum ejus nomen Gallicum est Picot, quemadmodum habetur in privilegio pro imprimendis ejus operibus.
He was first president of the chambers of inquiry of the Parlement of Paris, afterwards a canon of Paris. His Latin name is Picus, which some scholars rendered in French as Pic. Hence the distinguished Dupin mistakenly took the editor to be Pico della Mirandola (Bibliotheca auctorum, vol. I, p. 177, Latin edition, Cologne). But his true French name is Picot, as it stands in the privilege for printing his works.
(printed under page 180)
(74) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 339
Biblioth. PP. Lugdun. tom. III, pag. 253-259.
Lyons Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. III, pp. 253–259.
(printed under page 180)
(75) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 339
Hippolyt. Opp. tom. I, Append. pag. 4-29.
Works of Hippolytus, vol. I, Appendix, pp. 4–29.
(printed under page 180)
(76) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 339
Tillemont, Mémoir. tom. III, not. 6, p. 512.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, note 6, p. 512.
(printed under page 180)
(77) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 339
Bellarminus, De scriptor.; Baron. ad ann. 229, § 10; Labb., Script. eccles., pag. 471; Bullus, Defens. fid. Nic., lib. III, pag. 8.
Bellarmine, De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis; Baronius, at the year 229, § 10; Labbe, Scriptores ecclesiastici, p. 471; Bull, Defensio fidei Nicaenae, book III, p. 8.
(printed under page 180)
(78) ‹anchor: diserte testatus est› · call in col 339
Haec sola circumstantia, judice Remi Ceillier tom. II Hist. génér. des auteurs, pag. 360, sufficit ad demonstrandum praefatum De consummatione mundi tractatum, domini de Picot impressum, non esse sancti Hippolyti; sed habemus, pergit cl. Ceillier, alia quoque longe evidentiora argumenta. Ut enim nihil dicam de stylo humili ac puerili, cum econtra Hippolyti stylus gravis esset et sublimis, auctor facta defendit ac refert, quorum falsitas manifesta est omnibus. Sic, exempli gratia, tradit Joannem cum Elia et Enocho venturum ad testimonium perhibendum contra Antichristum (lib. De consumm. mundi, num. 21), in quo de falsitate redarguitur a Scriptura (Apoc. XI, 13); Antichristum daemonem esse sub specie humana apparentem, in quo et Paulo (II ad Thessal. II), et ipsi Hippolyto lib. De Antich., num. 5 et 6, contradicit, qui verum hominem Antichristum statuunt. Ea quoque, quae de monachis scribit num. 7, et de incenso in ecclesiis adhibito num. 34, clare ostendunt auctorem esse saeculo tertio posteriorem, in quo status monasticus nondum notus fuerat, neque incensi usus stabilitus, nisi quoad sepulturam mortuorum, uti ex Tertulliani discimus tractatibus De spectac., c. 11; De corona, c. 10; Apologet., c. 30 et 42.
This circumstance alone, in the judgement of Remi Ceillier (Histoire générale des auteurs, vol. II, p. 360), is enough to show that the aforesaid treatise On the consummation of the world, printed by M. de Picot, is not St Hippolytus's; but we have, the distinguished Ceillier goes on, other and far more evident arguments as well. To say nothing of the low and childish style, whereas Hippolytus's style was grave and lofty, the author maintains and relates things whose falsity is plain to all. Thus, for example, he teaches that John will come with Elijah and Enoch to bear witness against Antichrist (book On the consummation of the world, no. 21), in which he is convicted of falsehood by Scripture (Rev. 11:13); that Antichrist is a demon appearing in human form, in which he contradicts both Paul (2 Thess. 2) and Hippolytus himself (book On Antichrist, nos. 5 and 6), who hold that Antichrist is a real man. What he writes of monks in no. 7, too, and of incense used in churches in no. 34, plainly shows the author to be later than the third century, in which the monastic state was not yet known, nor the use of incense established except for the burial of the dead, as we learn from Tertullian's treatises On the Shows, ch. 11; On the Crown, ch. 10; Apology, chs. 30 and 42.
(printed under page 180)
(79) ‹anchor: Andreas Rivetus› · call in col 339
Rivet., Crit. lib. II, c. 11, p. 215.
Rivet, Critica sacra, book II, ch. 11, p. 215.
(printed under page 180)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A Hunc tractatum sub; B ab initio hunc; C majoris. Auctorem fuisse; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Hunc tractatum sub; daemo- split at column break
fore humana figura praeditum affirmat, quem contra Paulus vocat hominem peccati. Joannem, qui librum Apocalypseos scripsit, cum Elia et Enocho denuo affuturum fingit, ut Antichristum redarguat, « cui sententiae, ait Possevinus, non est acquiescendum. » Joannis Apocalypsim inscite pro Daniele usurpat. Animas hominum a saeculis fuisse affirmat, quod fuit Origenistarum figmentum : aliaque sunt ejus crebra insomnia atque deliria, quibus perpensis non possumus adduci, ut credamus libellum hunc esse veteris illius episcopi, etc. Hactenus Rivetus. Ellies Dupin Riveto suffragatus iisdem fere rationibus utitur. Sed et a Combefisio observatum est in Catena Patrum Graeca ad Jeremiam verba quaedam ex Hippolyto allegari, quae in Gudiano Hippolyto, non autem in hoc Pici reperiuntur. Eodem Combefisio judice illud, quod Hippolyti nomine opus De Antichristo hactenus pluteos oneraverat, sequioris Graeciae monumentum est, ac plane stramineum, nihil aevi illius sinceritatem redolens, aut venam magni cum simplicitate theologi, satisque in Scripturis versati; cujus parens eo ipso persuasus fuerit, quod scripsisse Hippolytum De Antichristo apud antiquos pervulgatum sit. Mirum profecto quod, tot tantisque contra authentiam hujus scripti stantibus rationum momentis, illud tamen ut authenticum S. Hippolyti opus perdoctus Natalis Alexander defendere ac tueri conatus fuerit.
endowed with a human figure, he affirms, whom on the contrary Paul calls the man of sin (2 Thess. 2:3). He feigns that John, who wrote the book of the Apocalypse, will be present again with Elias and Enoch to refute Antichrist, in which opinion, says Possevino, one must not acquiesce. He ignorantly uses the Apocalypse of John for Daniel. He affirms that the souls of men existed from the ages, which was a figment of the Origenists: and there are many other frequent dreams and ravings of his, having weighed which we cannot be induced to believe that this little book is of that ancient bishop, etc. Thus far Rivet. Ellies Dupin, supporting Rivet, uses almost the same reasons. But it has also been observed by Combefis that in the Greek Catena of the Fathers on Jeremias certain words from Hippolytus are alleged, which are found in the Gudian Hippolytus, but not in this of Picot. By the judgement of the same Combefis, that work which under the name of Hippolytus On Antichrist had hitherto burdened the shelves is a monument of later Greece, and altogether of straw, savouring nothing of the sincerity of that age, or the vein of a theologian great with simplicity and sufficiently versed in the Scriptures; whose parent was persuaded by the very fact that it was commonly spread abroad among the ancients that Hippolytus had written On Antichrist. It is assuredly wonderful that, while so many and so great weights of reasons stand against the authenticity of this writing, the very learned Natalis Alexander nevertheless endeavoured to defend and maintain it as an authentic work of Saint Hippolytus.
ARTICULUS II.
Article 2.
DE COMMENTARIO « IN APOCALYPSIN, » TRACTATU « DE DUODECIM APOSTOLIS, » ET ALIO « DE LXX DISCIPULIS, » SANCTO HIPPOLYTO NOSTRO FALSO ASCRIPTIS.
On the Commentary on the Apocalypse, the Treatise on the Twelve Apostles, and Another on the Seventy Disciples, Falsely Ascribed to Our Saint Hippolytus.
§ I. De commentario in Apocalypsin falso S. Hippolyto tributo.
Section 1. On the Commentary on the Apocalypse Falsely Attributed to Saint Hippolytus.
Sixtus Senensis scripsit, quod reperti fuerint
Sixtus of Siena wrote that there were found
Editors' notes and page, col. 340
Footnotes
(80) ‹anchor: atque deliria› · call in col 340
Excipe tamen quae auctor docet de Verbi aeternitate, sacrificio corporis et sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi, utpote sancto Hippolyto summopere congruentia.
Except, however, what the author teaches on the eternity of the Word and on the sacrifice of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, as being entirely in keeping with St Hippolytus.
(printed under page 180)
(81) ‹anchor: rationibus utitur› · call in col 340
Biblioth. auctor. tom. I, Dupin., pag. 179 edit. Lat. Colon.
Bibliotheca auctorum, vol. I, Dupin, p. 179 of the Latin edition, Cologne.
(printed under page 180)
(82) ‹anchor: Combefisio judice› · call in col 340
Combefis., Praef. notarum in librum S. Hippolyti genuinum De Antichristo, et apud Fabric. Opp. S. Hippol. tom. I, Append. pag. 6.
Combefis, Preface to his notes on St Hippolytus's genuine book On Antichrist, and in Fabricius, Works of St Hippolytus, vol. I, Appendix, p. 6.
(printed under page 180)
(83) ‹anchor: tueri conatus fuerit› · call in col 340
Natal. Alexand., Hist. eccl., saecul. III, c. 4, art. 1, p. 62.
Natalis Alexander, Historia ecclesiastica, third century, ch. 4, art. 1, p. 62.
(printed under page 180)
(84) ‹anchor: Sixtus Senensis scripsit› · call in col 340
Sixtus Senensis, lib. IV Biblioth. sanctae, p. 311.
Sixtus of Siena, Bibliotheca sancta, book IV, p. 311.
(printed under page 180)
Page
- running head: SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A nem fore humana; B quae in Gudiano; C ARTICULUS II.; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: nem fore humana; nem split from previous column, fue- split at column break
- other: the word fuerint was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 341
superioribus annis Basileae commentarii quidam in Apocalypsin Hippolyto inscripti, de quibus ob eruditionis et styli inopiam ambigitur. Perdoctus Rivetus conjicit, hunc Commentarium in Apocalypsin forsan haud diversum opus esse ab eo, quod edidit Picot seu Picus Graece ac Latine sub titulo : De consummatione mundi, et de Antichristo. Nescio, inquit hic criticus, an sit idem liber, de quo Sixtus Senensis lib. IV scripsit... Sive idem sit, sive alius, eadem est ambigendi ratio.
in former years at Basel certain commentaries on the Apocalypse inscribed with the name of Hippolytus, concerning which there is doubt on account of the poverty of learning and of style. The very learned Rivet conjectures that this Commentary on the Apocalypse is perhaps not a different work from that which Picot or Picus published in Greek and Latin under the title: On the Consummation of the World, and on Antichrist. I know not, says this critic, whether it is the same book concerning which Sixtus of Siena wrote in book 4... Whether it be the same or another, the ground for doubting is the same.
§ II. Tractatus de duodecim apostolis Hippolyto suppositus.
Section 2. Treatise on the Twelve Apostles Falsely Attributed to Hippolytus.
Sub nomine S. Hippolyti in Bibliotheca Patrum Lugdunensi et apud Combefisium in Auctuario novissimo Bibliothecae Patrum occurrit brevissimus tractatus De duodecim apostolis, ubinam quisque eorum praedicaverit, ac ubi consummatus sit. Idem tractatus sub ejusdem sancti Patris nomine reperitur etiam inter mss. Graeca bibliothecae Coislinianae; atque ad calcem tomi I Opp. S. Hippolyti Graece ac Latine typis excusus est. Observant insuper viri eruditi laudatum tractatum a Cedreno ac Michaele Glyca sub sancti nostri nomine allegari. Verum horum duorum Graeculorum haud tanta est auctoritas, ut eorum nudo asserto fidem habere debeamus. Ipse autem Combefisius fatetur se nihil habere, quo probet hunc tractatum esse sancti Hippolyti, praeter fidem Regii ms. codicis, ex quo exscripsit. Accedit, quod multa de morte apostolorum complectatur recentiorum Graecorum figmenta, qualia judice Dupinio sunt sequentia : Andream oleae affixum e vivis excessisse; Joannis reliquias in ejus tumulo inventas non esse; Bartholomaeum cruci fuisse affixum pronum in caput; Matthaeum apud Parthos praedicasse; Thomam ad Magos conciones habuisse, in quatuor locis hasta abiegna Salamine confossum esse; Thaddaeum in Mesopotamia praedicasse; Simonem apostolum sancto Jacobo in sede episcopali Hierosolymitana successisse; quae a recentiorum Graecorum figmentis petita sunt, ut a Sophronio et aliis.
Under the name of Saint Hippolytus in the Lyons Bibliotheca Patrum and in Combefis in the Auctuarium Novissimum of the Bibliotheca Patrum there occurs a very brief treatise On the Twelve Apostles, where each of them preached, and where he was consummated. The same treatise under the name of the same holy Father is found also among the Greek manuscripts of the Coislin library; and at the end of tome 1 of the Works of Saint Hippolytus it has been printed in Greek and Latin. Learned men observe in addition that the praised treatise is alleged by Cedrenus and Michael Glycas under the name of our saint. Yet the authority of these two petty Greeks is not so great that we ought to give credit to their bare assertion. Combefis himself, moreover, confesses that he has nothing whereby he may prove this treatise to be Saint Hippolytus's, besides the credit of the Royal manuscript codex from which he transcribed it. Added to this is the fact that it embraces many figments of the more recent Greeks concerning the death of the apostles, such as, in the judgement of Dupin, are the following: that Andrew departed from the living fastened to an olive tree; that the relics of John were not found in his tomb; that Bartholomew was fastened to the cross head downwards; that Matthew preached among the Parthians; that Thomas held discourses to the Magi, and was pierced in four places with a fir spear at Salamis; that Thaddaeus preached in Mesopotamia; that Simon the apostle succeeded Saint James in the episcopal see of Jerusalem; which things have been drawn from the figments of the more recent Greeks, as from Sophronius and others.
§ III. Tractatus de LXX discipulis S. Hippolyto suppositus.
Section 3. Treatise on the Seventy Disciples Falsely Attributed to Saint Hippolytus.
Impressum etiam fuit e codice Barocciano 206 aliud sub ejusdem Hippolyti nomine opusculum De LXX discipulis, seu ut inscriptio prae se fert De LXX apostolis Jesu Christi; licet nulla de plurimis
There was also printed from the Baroccian codex 206 another short work under the name of the same Hippolytus On the Seventy Disciples, or as the inscription bears before it, On the Seventy Apostles of Jesus Christ; although no mention is made of very many
Editors' notes and page, col. 341
Footnotes
(85) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 341
Rivet, loc. cit.
Rivet, at the place cited.
(printed under page 181)
(86) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 341
Biblioth. PP. Lugdun., tom. III, p. 265.
Lyons Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. III, p. 265.
(printed under page 181)
(87) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 341
Biblioth. Coisl., p. 413.
Bibliotheca Coisliniana, p. 413.
(printed under page 181)
(88) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 341
Fabric., tom. I Opp. S. Hippol., pag. 30 et seq.
Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of St Hippolytus, p. 30 ff.
(printed under page 181)
(89) ‹anchor: Cedreno› · call in col 341
Cedren. in Compend. hist., p. 203.
Cedrenus, in the Compendium historiarum, p. 203.
(printed under page 181)
(90) ‹anchor: nomine allegari› · call in col 341
Michael Glycas, part. III Annal., p. 239.
Michael Glycas, Annals part III, p. 239.
(printed under page 181)
(91) ‹anchor: judice Dupinio› · call in col 341
Dupin, Biblioth. auctor., tom. I, p. 180, in not. 9.
Dupin, Bibliotheca auctorum, vol. I, p. 180, in note 9.
(printed under page 181)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A rint superioribus annis; B tractatus De duodecim; C de morte apostolorum; D Impressum etiam fuit
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: rint superioribus annis; rint split from previous column
apostolis mentio fiat. Opusculum hoc perexiguum nil est, nisi catalogus temere consarcinatus de LXX discipulis, eorumque praecipuis proprietatibus, potissimum e phantasia confictis, atque etiam nominibus falso attributis; unde etiam nullo modo meretur prae se ferre nomen sancti nostri Hippolyti. Sic, exempli causa, plurimae personae inter discipulos Domini recensentur hic, quae tamen primum post praedicationem S. Pauli apostoli ad fidem conversae fuerunt, atque consequenter nunquam inter discipulos Salvatoris computari possunt. Dein tradit hic auctor, quod sanctus Marcus et sanctus Lucas e numero illorum discipulorum fuerint, qui super dicto Jesu Christi : Nisi quis comedat carnem meam et bibat sanguinem meum, non est me dignus, scandalum passi, a Salvatoris societate se segregarint; sed postea ille per Petrum, hic autem Paulo suadente permotus ad Christum reversi, martyrio vitam consummarint. Dicit quoque S. Clementem Sardiniae episcopum, Crescentem Chalcedoniae in Galliis episcopum fuisse. Duos etiam Barnabas diversos statuit; unum Mediolani, alterum Heracleae episcopum fingit. Caeterum eruditi observant, exiguum hoc opusculum ut plurimum convenire cum pseudo-Dorotheo, idemque verisimiliter esse cum eodem. Quae autem de LXX discipulis habet Baronius ad Martyrologium Romanum IX Aprilis, et in Annalibus ad ann. Chr. 44, n. 58, et ann. 58, n. 56, allegans hunc Hippolyti libellum, quem Graece habuit Sirletus, ex Hippolyti Thebani Chronico petita Fabricio videntur. Exstat vero perexiguus hic libellus cum superiore scripto De duodecim apostolis sub Hippolyti nomine in codicibus duobus bibliothecae Coislinianae sive Seguierianae; ut testatur cl. Montfauconus in recensione mss. Graecorum illius bibliothecae. Fabricius eumdem tractatum tom. I Opp. S. Hippolyti, pag. 41 appendicis, inseruit Graece ac Latine.
apostles. This very tiny work is nothing else than a rashly patched-up catalogue concerning the seventy disciples and their chief properties, mostly invented out of fancy, and also with falsely attributed names; whence also it in no way deserves to bear before it the name of our Saint Hippolytus. Thus, for example, very many persons are reckoned here among the disciples of the Lord who nevertheless were first converted to the faith after the preaching of Saint Paul the Apostle, and consequently can never be reckoned among the disciples of the Saviour. Next, this author hands down that Saint Mark and Saint Luke were of the number of those disciples who, having suffered scandal at the saying of Jesus Christ: Unless a man eat My flesh and drink My blood, he is not worthy of Me (John 6:54; Matt. 10:37), separated themselves from the company of the Saviour; but afterwards, the former moved by Peter, and the latter by the persuasion of Paul, having returned to Christ, consummated their life by martyrdom. He says also that Saint Clement was bishop of Sardinia, and Crescens bishop of Chalcedon in Gaul. He establishes also two different Barnabases; he feigns the one bishop of Milan, the other of Heraclea. For the rest, the learned observe that this slender short work for the most part agrees with pseudo-Dorotheus, and is probably the same with it. Moreover what Baronius has concerning the seventy disciples on the Roman Martyrology for the ninth of April, and in the Annals on the year of Christ 44, number 58, and the year 58, number 56, alleging this little book of Hippolytus, which Sirleto had in Greek, seems to Fabricius to have been drawn from the Chronicle of Hippolytus of Thebes. And this very tiny book is extant with the preceding writing On the Twelve Apostles under the name of Hippolytus in two codices of the Coislin or Séguier library, as the illustrious Montfaucon testifies in his review of the Greek manuscripts of that library. Fabricius inserted the same treatise in tome 1 of the Works of Saint Hippolytus, page 41 of the appendix, in Greek and Latin.
ARTICULUS III.
Article 3.
DE ALIIS OPERIBUS S. HIPPOLYTO FALSE ASCRIPTIS.
On Other Works Falsely Ascribed to Saint Hippolytus.
§ I. Genealogia SS. Mariae et Josephi opus supposititium.
Section 1. The Genealogy of Saints Mary and Joseph a Spurious Work.
Nicephorus Callistus allegat ex sancto Hippolyto episcopo Portuensi fragmentum satis prolixum circa genealogiam sancti Josephi et beatissimae Virginis. Verum non est ambigendum quin hic historicus hallucinatus fuerit, intelligendo sanctum Hippolytum martyrem pro Hippolyto Thebano,
Nicephorus Callistus alleges from Saint Hippolytus, bishop of Porto, a sufficiently lengthy fragment concerning the genealogy of Saint Joseph and the most blessed Virgin. Yet it is not to be doubted that this historian blundered, understanding Saint Hippolytus the martyr for Hippolytus of Thebes,
Editors' notes and page, col. 342
Footnotes
(92) ‹anchor: esse cum eodem› · call in col 342
Dupin, loc. citat.; Remi Ceillier, loc. citat., p. 361.
Dupin, at the place cited; Remi Ceillier, at the place cited, p. 361.
(printed under page 181)
(93) ‹anchor: petita Fabricio› · call in col 342
Fabricius, Biblioth. Graec., lib. V, part. I, p. 212.
Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca, book V, part I, p. 212.
(printed under page 181)
(94) ‹anchor: Nicephorus Callistus› · call in col 342
Nicephorus Callist., lib. II Histor. eccles., cap. 3.
Nicephorus Callistus, Ecclesiastical History book II, ch. 3.
(printed under page 181)
(95) ‹anchor: beatissimae Virginis› · call in col 342
Maurini nostri in Hist. littér. de la France, tom. I, pag. 395, duo hic opuscula distinguunt: unum sc. de genealogia sancti Josephi, ejusque tota familia; alterum nimirum librum de ortu et familia beatissimae Virginis, hic tamen libellus juxta illos non est nisi epitome prioris. Perdoctus Jacobus Basnagius suis in observationibus in Chronicon Hippolyti Thebani utrumque opusculum velut fragmentum operis laudati scriptoris juris publici fecit tom. III Lect. antiquit. Canisii, p. 39 et 40.
Our Maurists, in the Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, p. 395, distinguish two little works here: one, namely, on the genealogy of St Joseph and his whole family; the other, a book on the birth and family of the most blessed Virgin; yet this little book, according to them, is only an epitome of the former. The very learned Jacques Basnage, in his observations on the Chronicle of Hippolytus of Thebes, published both little works as a fragment of that writer's work, in vol. III of Canisius's Lectiones antiquae, pp. 39 and 40.
(printed under page 181)
Page
- running head: ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A apostolis mentio fiat.; B dignus, scandalum passi,; C quem Graece habuit; D lixum circa genealogiam
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: apostolis mentio fiat.; The- split at column break
scriptore saeculi undecimi ad finem vergentis, aut saeculo duodecimo ineunte florentis; vixit enim post Simeonem Metaphrasten. Siquidem hoc fragmentum revera quoad omnes partes in Chronico Hippolyti Thebani Graece ac Latine abs Emmanuele Schelstrate anno 1692 in lucem edito et postea a cl. Fabricio appendici tomi I Operum S. Hippolyti episcopi ac martyris inserto reperitur. Caeterum ea quae referuntur in hoc Chronico de genealogia sancti Josephi ejusque tota familia, omnimodam fictionis similitudinem prae se ferunt; quinimo cum doctissimo Remigio Ceilliero asserere non dubitamus integrum opus nil aliud esse quam falsitatum texturam. Nescio autem, inquit laudatus vir doctus, unde auctor didicerit Patres in Nicaena synodo statuisse, ut non ordinarentur presbyteri ante triginta annos, dixisseque, sufficere discipulo ut sit sicut magister, et servo, ut sit sicut dominus ejus. Credit quoque hic auctor sanctum Josephum beatissimae Virginis sponsum duas uxores habuisse, atque ex prima Salome dicta, quae fuit filia Aggaei fratris Zachariae, patris Joannis Baptistae, quatuor filios, Jacobum, Simonem, Judam et Joseph, et duas filias Esther et Martham suscepisse.
a writer of the eleventh century verging towards its close, or flourishing at the beginning of the twelfth century; for he lived after Simeon Metaphrastes. Since indeed this fragment is in truth found as regards all its parts in the Chronicle of Hippolytus of Thebes published in Greek and Latin by Emmanuel Schelstrate in the year 1692 and afterwards inserted by the illustrious Fabricius in the appendix of tome 1 of the Works of Saint Hippolytus, bishop and martyr. For the rest, the things which are reported in this Chronicle concerning the genealogy of Saint Joseph and his whole family bear before them every likeness of fiction; nay more, with the most learned Rémi Ceillier we do not hesitate to assert that the entire work is nothing else than a web of falsehoods. Now I know not, says the praised learned man, whence the author learned that the Fathers in the Nicene Synod decreed that presbyters should not be ordained before thirty years, and said that it suffices for the disciple that he be as the master, and for the servant that he be as his lord (Matt. 10:25). This author believes also that Saint Joseph, spouse of the most blessed Virgin, had two wives, and from the first, called Salome, who was the daughter of Aggaeus the brother of Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, begot four sons, James, Simon, Jude, and Joseph, and two daughters, Esther and Martha.
Fragmentum ex Chronico Hippolyti Thebani exstat editum a Joanne Sambuco Patavii 1556, Latine in-8, typis Gratiosi Perchacini sub titulo Libelli de ortu et cognatione Virginis Mariae, et asservatur ms. in bibliotheca Caesarea, sed brevissimum. Longius exstat in Lectionibus antiquis Henrici Canisii, tom. III, pag. 35, Graece ac Latine. Non pauci scriptores, qui personas, nomen Hippolyti prae se ferentes, non satis distinxerunt, neque tempora in quibus illae vixerunt, hoc fragmentum sancto nostro Hippolyto episcopo ac martyri attribuerunt; persuasissimum habentes Chronica haec in laterculo tabulae Graecae designata esse. Interim tamen error hic tam grandis est, ut per se patescat, mirandumque prorsus quod non illico detectus fuerit. Manifestum est
A fragment from the Chronicle of Hippolytus of Thebes is extant, published by Joannes Sambucus at Padua in 1556, in Latin in octavo, with the types of Gratiosus Perchacinus under the title of Little Book on the Birth and Kindred of the Virgin Mary, and is preserved in manuscript in the Imperial library, but very brief. It is extant at greater length in the Lectiones Antiquae of Henricus Canisius, tome 3, page 35, in Greek and Latin. Not a few writers, who did not sufficiently distinguish the persons bearing before them the name of Hippolytus, nor the times in which they lived, attributed this fragment to our Saint Hippolytus, bishop and martyr, holding it as most certain that these Chronicles were designated in the list of the Greek table. Meanwhile, however, this error is so great that it is patent of itself, and it is altogether wonderful that it was not detected on the spot. It is manifest
Editors' notes and page, col. 343
Footnotes
(96) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 343
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, tom. II. p. 1081 et seq.; Canis., tom. III Lect. antiq., p. 35, 46, 49; Voss., Hist. Graec., lib. II, c. 25, p. 293; Possevin., Apparat., p. 765.
Le Moyne, Varia sacra, vol. II, p. 1081 ff.; Canisius, vol. III of the Lectiones antiquae, pp. 35, 46, 49; Vossius, De historicis Graecis, book II, ch. 25, p. 293; Possevino, Apparatus sacer, p. 765.
(printed under page 182)
(97) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 343
Schelestr. in Antiquit eccles. dissert. illustrata, tom. I, p. 510 et seqq.
Schelstrate, in Antiquitas ecclesiae dissertationibus illustrata, vol. I, p. 510 ff.
(printed under page 182)
(98) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 343
Fabric., p. 46 et seq.
Fabricius, p. 46 ff.
(printed under page 182)
(99) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 343
Remi Ceillier, tom. II Hist. gén., p. 362.
Remi Ceillier, Histoire générale, vol. II, p. 362.
(printed under page 182)
(1) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 343
Idem ibid. et pag. 363.
The same, ibid., and p. 363.
(printed under page 182)
(2) ‹anchor: suscepisse› · call in col 343
Fabric., loc. cit., pag. 47.
Fabricius, at the place cited, p. 47.
(printed under page 182)
(3) ‹anchor: sed brevissimum› · call in col 343
Lambecius Graece e codice Vindob., tom. III, pag. 46. Vide eumdem pag. 98 seq. et tom. IV p. 150, tom. V pag. 109 seq., tom. VII pag. 341, tom. VIII pag. 63; et Allatium De aetate et interstitiis in collatione apud Graecos, pag. 50. Etiam Hippolyti historici fragmentum, in quo Salome Josephi βιωτικὴ γυνὴ appellatur, a Salmasio sibi communicatum refert Andreas Rivetus tom. III Opp. p. 640. Allegat et Turrianus in Apologia pro domo Lauretana adversus Vergerium, et in scholiis ad lib. II Constitut. apostol.
Lambeck, in Greek from the Vienna codex, vol. III, p. 46. See the same, p. 98 f., and vol. IV p. 150, vol. V p. 109 f., vol. VII p. 341, vol. VIII p. 63; and Allatius, On the age and intervals in ordination among the Greeks, p. 50. Andreas Rivet, too (Works vol. III, p. 640), reports a fragment of Hippolytus the historian, communicated to him by Salmasius, in which Salome is called Joseph's wife in ordinary life. Turrianus also cites it, in the Apology for the Holy House of Loreto against Vergerio, and in the scholia on book II of the Apostolic Constitutions.
(printed under page 182)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A bano, scriptore saeculi; B dicerit Patres in; C Longius exstat in; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: bano, scriptore saeculi; bano split from previous column
auctorem hujus fragmenti ante saeculum XI non vixisse; neque hic ullum errandi periculum, cum citet saepius Metaphrasten scriptorem saeculi XI.
that the author of this fragment did not live before the eleventh century; nor is there here any danger of erring, since he often cites Metaphrastes, a writer of the eleventh century.
§ II. Chronicon S. Hippolyto suppositum.
Section 2. Chronicle Falsely Attributed to Saint Hippolytus.
Ascribitur sancto nostro Hippolyto etiam prima pars alterius cujusdam Chronici, a Canisio evulgati, et a Fabricio aliquantulum accuratius reimpressi, atque postea a Jacobo Basnagio integre omnino editi. Hoc Chronicon usque ad Caroli Mag. tempora progreditur. Verum hic non agitur, nisi de prima ejus parte, in qua leves quaedam differentiae observantur duas inter editiones Basnagii ac Fabricii. Conveniunt autem eruditi, quod sub imperio Alexandri Severi compositum; utut longe certius sit, ut verum fatear, illud non prius, quam sub ejus successore Maximino I perfectum fuisse : cum juxta exemplar Fabricii omne imperii Alexandri Severi tempus his terminis designetur : Alexander annis tredecim, diebus novem. Jam vero hic terminus nos deducit usque ad annum 235 inclusive, ultra quem sanctum Hippolytum vixisse non est certum. Neque aliunde perspicimus, quo jure ac fundamento haec prior Chronici pars eidem attribui possit. Verum quidem est, uti ex Eusebio atque sancto Hieronymo discimus, nostrum Hippolytum Chronicum composuisse, sed relate ad diem Paschatis. Sine dubio autem illud non est hoc, de quo hic controvertitur; neque hic observatur minima nota de aliquo opere hujus generis. Verum quoque adhuc est, quod tabula, quae plures operum sancti Hippolyti titulos complectitur, eidem ascribat chronica contra Graecos et contra Platonem; at vero Chronicon, quod hujus controversiae objectum est, nihil habet unde colligi liceret illud esse idem ipsissimum. Verosimillimum itaque est atque creditu longe facilius, si cum Basnagio dicamus hanc priorem Chronici partem spectare ad Julium Africanum, qui sub imperio Alexandri floruit. En quomodo omnes difficultatum nodi hac ratione expediri possint. Omnes sciunt generatim sanctum nostrum Hippolytum
There is ascribed to our Saint Hippolytus also the first part of a certain other Chronicle, published by Canisius, and reprinted somewhat more accurately by Fabricius, and afterwards edited altogether entire by Jacques Basnage. This Chronicle advances down to the times of Charlemagne. Yet here the question is only of its first part, in which certain slight differences are observed between the two editions of Basnage and of Fabricius. Now the learned agree that it was composed under the reign of Alexander Severus; although it is far more certain, to confess the truth, that it was not completed before the reign of his successor Maximinus I: since according to the copy of Fabricius the whole time of the reign of Alexander Severus is designated in these terms: Alexander thirteen years, nine days. Now this term brings us down to the year 235 inclusive, beyond which it is not certain that Saint Hippolytus lived. Nor do we perceive from elsewhere by what right and foundation this former part of the Chronicle can be attributed to him. It is true indeed, as we learn from Eusebius and Saint Jerome, that our Hippolytus composed a Chronicle, but in relation to the day of Easter. Without doubt, however, that is not this one, concerning which the controversy is here; nor is there observed here the slightest mark of any work of this kind. It is also true further that the table which embraces several titles of the works of Saint Hippolytus ascribes to him chronicles against the Greeks and against Plato; but the Chronicle which is the object of this controversy has nothing whence one might gather that it is that very same one. It is therefore most probable and far easier to believe, if with Basnage we say that this former part of the Chronicle belongs to Julius Africanus, who flourished under the reign of Alexander. Behold how all the knots of difficulties can be untangled in this way. All know in general that our Saint Hippolytus
Editors' notes and page, col. 344
Footnotes
(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 344
Henric. Canisius, Bavarico codice usus, Graece ac Latine tomo III Antiq. lect., Ingolstad. 1603, in-4, p. 40. Ex Canisii editione Latine cum ejus notis legitur in Bibl. PP. Colon. tom. IX, anno 1618, et in supplemento Bibl. PP. Paris. 1639, apud Morell., tom. II, pag. 806, et tom. XV Bibl. PP. Lugdun., pag. 240; item Canisius, tom. II Lect. antiq, anno 1602, pag. 579, ex duobus codicibus hoc titulo: Collectio historica chronographica ex anonymo, qui sub Alexandro Severo imperatore vixit, collectore Gallo quodam Caroli Magni temporibus. Incipit: Liber generationum primus. Addit Canisius in margine: « In ms. codice minore, nam in majore ms. totus liber primus abest, non erat praeter hunc alius titulus huic libro praefixus. » Deinde idem Chronicon emendatius aliquanto (licet et ipsum passim in nominibus praesertim propriis castigatione indigens) atque capite de imperatoribus auctius editum est a Phil. Labbeo S. J. Paris. 1657, fol., tom. I Bibliothecae novae ms. pag. 298, ex alio codice ms. collegii Claromontani Parisiensis S. J. hoc titulo: Chronologi anonymi, qui sub Alexandro imperatore vixisse anno Christi 236 dicitur, libellus seu chronicon de divisionibus et generationibus gentium. Labbeanam editionem secutus est Du Cangius in appendice ad Chronicon paschale, Paris. 1688, fol., pag. 413.
Henricus Canisius, using a Bavarian codex, in Greek and Latin in vol. III of the Antiquae lectiones, Ingolstadt 1603, quarto, p. 40. From Canisius's edition it is read in Latin with his notes in the Cologne Bibliotheca Patrum vol. IX, 1618, and in the supplement to the Paris Bibliotheca Patrum of 1639, printed by Morel, vol. II, p. 806, and in the Lyons Bibliotheca Patrum vol. XV, p. 240; likewise Canisius, vol. II of the Lectiones antiquae, 1602, p. 579, from two codices, under this title: A historical and chronographical collection from an anonymous author who lived under the emperor Alexander Severus, the collector being a certain Gaul of the times of Charlemagne. Here begins the first Book of Generations. Canisius adds in the margin: "In the smaller manuscript codex (for in the larger manuscript the whole first book is missing) no other title besides this was prefixed to this book." Afterwards the same Chronicle, somewhat more correctly (though it too everywhere needs emendation, especially in proper names) and enlarged by a chapter on the emperors, was published by Philippe Labbe S.J., Paris 1657, folio, vol. I of the Nova bibliotheca manuscriptorum, p. 298, from another manuscript codex of the Paris Collège de Clermont S.J., under this title: The little book or chronicle of an anonymous chronologer, said to have lived under the emperor Alexander in the year of Christ 236, on the divisions and generations of the nations. Du Cange followed Labbe's edition in the appendix to the Chronicon paschale, Paris 1688, folio, p. 413.
(printed under page 182)
(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 344
Fabric., tom. I Opp. S. Hippolyti, pag. 49-5[?]
Fabricius, vol. I of the Works of St Hippolytus, pp. 49–5[?] [last figure unclear on the scan].
(printed under page 182)
(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 344
Idem ibid., pag. 59.
The same, ibid., p. 59.
(printed under page 182)
(7) ‹anchor: cum Basnagio› · call in col 344
Apud Canis., Lect. antiq., tom. II, p. 148.
In Canisius, Lectiones antiquae, vol. II, p. 148.
(printed under page 182)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A auctorem hujus fragmenti; B successore Maximino I; C bula, quae plures; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: auctorem hujus fragmenti
composuisse Chronicon : aliquod igitur inquirendum, quod ei attribui possit. Statim sese offert Chronicon Hippolyti Thebani; atque propterea falso ascriptum fuit sancto nostro episcopo ac martyri; postea detegitur, quod istud non possit illius esse; atque tandem aliis venit in mentem illud Julii Africani eidem adjudicare. Haec Jacobus Basnagius. Nos cum altero Basnagio, Samuele nimirum, arbitramur, editum ab Henrico Canisio, SS. canonum Ingolstadii professore, Chronicum longe ab eo diversum esse, quod Hippolyto episcopo Portus Romani in marmore vindicatur. Quippe in eo reperiuntur nomina Constantini Magni, Eusebii, Arii, Basilii Magni, imo Metaphrastis etiam.
composed a Chronicle: some one must therefore be sought which can be attributed to him. Immediately there presents itself the Chronicle of Hippolytus of Thebes; and on that account it was falsely ascribed to our saintly bishop and martyr; afterwards it is detected that that one cannot be his; and finally it comes into the mind of others to adjudge to him that of Julius Africanus. Thus Jacques Basnage. We with the other Basnage, namely Samuel, think that the Chronicle published by Henricus Canisius, professor of the sacred canons at Ingolstadt, is far different from that which on the marble is claimed for Hippolytus, bishop of Portus Romanus. Since indeed in it are found the names of Constantine the Great, Eusebius, Arius, Basil the Great, nay even of Metaphrastes.
§ III. Fragmenta ex Catena Arabica non sunt S. Hippoly⟨t⟩i.
Section 3. The Fragments from the Arabic Catena Are Not of Saint Hippolytus.
Albertus Fabricius volumine posteriori Operum S. Hippolyti fragmenta, seu excerpta ex ms. Catena Arabica Pentateuchum referente, litteris descripta Syriacis e codice bibliothecae Bodleianae primum edita cum versione Joannis Gagnierii, imprimi curavit. Nomen sancti Hippolyti inter aliorum sanctorum Patrum III, IV et V saeculi nomina occurrit hisce in excerptis, atque Hippolytus noster circiter quadraginta loca commentatus est in hoc opere. Primus locus, ubi occurrit nomen Hippolyti, est in Genesis cap. VI, 17.
Albert Fabricius in the later volume of the Works of Saint Hippolytus had printed the fragments, or excerpts from a manuscript Arabic Catena on the Pentateuch, written in Syriac letters from a codex of the Bodleian library, first published with the version of Jean Gagnier. The name of Saint Hippolytus occurs among the names of other holy Fathers of the third, fourth, and fifth centuries in these excerpts, and our Hippolytus commented on about forty passages in this work. The first passage where the name of Hippolytus occurs is on Genesis chapter 6:17.
Verum haec Hippolytea Fabriciana excerpta supposititia esse noscuntur. Ibi enim nothus Hippolytus ubique appellatur Expositor Targum, nuspiam vero episcopus aut martyr; cum tamen ibidem reliqui Patres proprio charactere insigniti compareant : videlicet S. Athanasius, patriarcha Alexandrinus; S. Basilius, episcopus Caesareae; S. Epiphanius, episcopus Cypri, etc. Accedit Hippolyti hujus Targumistae interpretationes sapere plerumque rabbinorum ineptias, indignas plane tanto Patre, quantus fuisse perhibetur in sacris litteris potissimum explanandis verus Hippolytus.
Yet these Fabrician Hippolytean excerpts are known to be spurious. For there the bastard Hippolytus is everywhere called Expositor of the Targum, and nowhere bishop or martyr; whereas in the same place the rest of the Fathers appear distinguished by their proper character: namely Saint Athanasius, patriarch of Alexandria; Saint Basil, bishop of Caesarea; Saint Epiphanius, bishop of Cyprus, etc. Added to this is the fact that the interpretations of this Targumist Hippolytus savour for the most part of the follies of the rabbis, altogether unworthy of so great a Father as the true Hippolytus is reported to have been above all in explaining the sacred letters.
§ IV. Scripta S. Hippolyto attributa ab Aethiopibus et Chaldaeis.
Section 4. Writings Attributed to Saint Hippolytus by the Ethiopians and Chaldeans.
Silentio denique praeterimus lucubrationes S. Hippolyto a Syro-Chaldaeis tributas, quas in bibliotheca Orientali Clementino-Vaticana tomo III, part. I, pag. 15, videre est, ubi eruditissimus Assemannus ex Syriaco Ebed Jesu episcopi Sobensis catalogo quosdam librorum titulos Latine reddit his verbis : Sanctus Hippolytus martyr et episcopus composuit librum de dispensatione, et expositionem Danielis minoris et Susannae, et capita adversus Caium, et Apologiam pro Apocalypsi et Evangelio Joannis apostoli et evangelistae.
Finally we pass over in silence the lucubrations attributed to Saint Hippolytus by the Syro-Chaldeans, which may be seen in the Clementine-Vatican Oriental Library, tome 3, part 1, page 15, where the most learned Assemani renders into Latin from the Syriac catalogue of Ebedjesu, bishop of Soba, certain titles of books in these words: Saint Hippolytus, martyr and bishop, composed a book on the dispensation, and an exposition of the lesser Daniel and Susanna, and heads against Caius, and an Apology for the Apocalypse and the Gospel of John the apostle and evangelist.
Editors' notes and page, col. 345
Footnotes
(8) ‹anchor: Samuele nimirum› · call in col 345
Samuel Basnage, Annal. polit. eccl., tom. II, p. 290.
Samuel Basnage, Annales politico-ecclesiastici, vol. II, p. 290.
(printed under page 183)
(9) ‹anchor: imprimi curavit› · call in col 345
Fabric., Opp. S. Hippolyt., tom. II, p. 37-44.
Fabricius, Works of St Hippolytus, vol. II, pp. 37–44.
(printed under page 183)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A composuisse Chronicon :; B Albertus Fabricius volumine; C episcopus aut martyr;; D ARTICULUS I.
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: composuisse Chronicon :; three full-width heading lines (DE DOCTRINA S. I..., CAPUT PRIM..., OBSERVATIONES DOG...) above ARTICULUS I cut off at right edge; set in c346 in reading order (Q3a)
Arabes etiam S. Hippolyto tribuunt triginta octo disciplinae ecclesiasticae canones, ut laudatus Assemannus ibidem testatur his verbis : Canones Arabicos duodequadraginta sub ejus nomine col⟨l⟩egit, tomoque primo Canonum Ecclesiae Alexandrinae inseruit Macarius presbyter ac monachus monasterii Sancti Macarii, in codice Arabico scripto anno Christi 1372. Joannes Michael Wanslebius Dominicanus in Historia Ecclesiae Alexandrinae parte V, cap. 3, seu pag. 280 et sequentibus, hos triginta octo canones sub nomine Abulidis Gallice edidit, et ibidem in margine lectorem monet se ne conjectura quidem assequi potuisse quis fuerit ille Abulides. Verum Jobus Ludolfus in Historia Aethiopica, p. 333 et sequente, eosdem S. Hippolyti canones Latine interpretatus est, ibique Wanslebium docet, Hippolytum ab Aethiopibus Abulidem vocari, ac denique post exhibitos istos triginta octo canones haec addit: « Propter hos canones Hippolytus vocatur doctor Ecclesiae ab Aethiopibus; et tam ab ipsis, quam a reliquis Orientalibus, appellatur papa Ro⟨m⟩anus, cum tamen in Catalogo pontificum non reperiatur. Attamen invenitur in synaxariis Graecorum XXX Januarii, qui est V Februarii apud Aethiopes. » Caeterum horum canonum capita primus Gallice vulgavit Jo. Michael Wanslebius in libro De Ecclesia Alexandrina, Parisiis 1677, in-12. Latine Jobus Ludolfus in Commentario ad historiam Aethiopicam, Francofurti 1691, fol., pag. 333, et novissime Guil. Wistonus in volumine III operis, quod Primitivum Christianismum renatum inscripsit et Anglice edidit Londini 1711, 8°, p. 543. Idem etiam loca Constitutionum apostolicarum adnotavit de iisdem argumentis tractantia. Fabricius tandem ad calcem praefationis, num. 22, ad tomum I Opp. Hippolyti subjunxit, inserenda alias infra pag. 261.
The Arabs also attribute to Saint Hippolytus thirty-eight canons of ecclesiastical discipline, as the praised Assemani testifies in the same place in these words: Thirty-eight Arabic canons under his name Macarius, presbyter and monk of the monastery of Saint Macarius, collected and inserted in the first tome of the Canons of the Church of Alexandria, in an Arabic codex written in the year of Christ 1372. Johann Michael Vansleb, a Dominican, in his History of the Church of Alexandria, part 5, chapter 3, or page 280 and following, published these thirty-eight canons in French under the name of Abulides, and in the same place in the margin warns the reader that he could not even by conjecture attain to who that Abulides was. Yet Hiob Ludolf in his Ethiopian History, page 333 and following, translated the same canons of Saint Hippolytus into Latin, and there teaches Vansleb that Hippolytus is called Abulides by the Ethiopians, and finally after exhibiting those thirty-eight canons adds these words: On account of these canons Hippolytus is called a doctor of the Church by the Ethiopians; and both by them and by the rest of the Orientals he is called Roman pope, although nevertheless he is not found in the Catalogue of Pontiffs. However, he is found in the synaxaria of the Greeks on the thirtieth of January, which is the fifth of February among the Ethiopians. For the rest, Johann Michael Vansleb first published the heads of these canons in French in his book On the Church of Alexandria, Paris, 1677, in duodecimo; in Latin Hiob Ludolf in his Commentary on the Ethiopian History, Frankfurt, 1691, folio, page 333; and most recently William Whiston in volume 3 of the work which he entitled Primitive Christianity Revived and published in English at London in 1711, octavo, page 543. The same man also noted the passages of the Apostolic Constitutions treating of the same subjects. Finally Fabricius subjoined them at the end of his preface, number 22, to tome 1 of the Works of Hippolytus, to be inserted elsewhere below on page 261.
DE DOCTRINA S. HIPPOLYTI.
ON THE DOCTRINE OF ST HIPPOLYTUS.
CAPUT PRIMUM.
CHAPTER ONE.
OBSERVATIONES DOGMATICAE.
DOGMATIC OBSERVATIONS.
ARTICULUS I.
Article 1.
DE S. SCRIPTURA LIBRISQUE ALIQUIBUS DEUTEROCANONICIS.
On Sacred Scripture and Certain Deuterocanonical Books.
Inspiratio divina sacrae Scripturae. — Innumeros habemus in divo Hippolyto articulos circa primarias veritates religionis Christianae. Ut autem a sacra Scriptura ordiamur, id primo loco notandum est, vetustum hunc episcopum agnoscere divinam sacrorum librorum inspirationem; docet enim prophetas, hoc est sacros scriptores, qui antiquitus
Divine inspiration of Sacred Scripture. — We have in Saint Hippolytus innumerable articles concerning the primary truths of the Christian religion. Now that we may begin from Sacred Scripture, this in the first place is to be noted, that this ancient bishop acknowledges the divine inspiration of the sacred books; for he teaches that the prophets, that is the sacred writers, who of old
Editors' notes and page, col. 346
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A pag. 15, videre; B sti 1372. Joannes; C men invenitur in; D veritates religionis Christianae.
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: pag. 15, videre; three full-width heading lines (...NA S. HIPPOLYTI., ...UT PRIMUM., ...TIONES DOGMATICAE.) above veritates religionis cut off at left edge; set in c346 in reading order after the upper right-column text (Q3a)
prophetarum nomine designabantur, fuisse organa, per quae Verbum annuntiabat hominibus divinam voluntatem : « Hi namque Patres, inquit divus Hippolytus, Spiritu prophetiae aptati, digneque ab ipso Verbo honorati, quo nimirum velut organa in seipsis semper unitum Verbum tanquam plectrum haberent, cujus nutu atque afflatu, quae Deus vellet, haec prophetae annuntiabant. Non enim ex sua facultate loquebantur, nec quae ex animo essent, haec praedicabant; sed primum quidem Verbi numine rite sapientia imbuti, exinde per visa, quae essent futura, probe praedocebantur; ac demum certa jam rerum fide, ea dicebant ac praedicabant, quae illis divino duntaxat numine manifesta forent, reliquis vero abscondita. Nam qua ratione propheta vocaretur, nisi quae sunt futura, Spiritu praevideret?.... Unde convenienter prophetae a principio videntes vocabantur. » Illud etiam subjungit, Verbum hos sacros scriptores coegisse per Spiritum sanctum loqui; Verbum in his versatum fuisse, in his locutum fuisse, suam annuntians futuram incarnationem : « Hic autem, » loquitur hoc loco de Filio Dei, « dedit legem et prophetas; et dando coegit hos per Spiritum sanctum loqui, ut accipientes virtutis Paternae inspirationem, consilium et voluntatem Patris nuntiarent. In his igitur Verbum versabatur loquens de [se] ipso. Jam enim ipse suus praeco erat, ostendebatque futurum esse ut Verbum hominibus appareret. » Ecquid efficacius pro divinorum librorum inspiratione dici potest? Et quis post haec audebit inire disputationem de natura hujus inspirationis, scilicet num immediata sit, vel solum mediata? Scriptores prophetiae Spiritu repleti : scriptores, qui sunt veluti organa, per quae Verbum divinam voluntatem annuntiat; scriptores a seipsis non loquentes, sed sapientia et inspiratione divina; scriptores, uno verbo, quos Verbum cogit per Spiritum sanctum loqui, nunquid aliter locuti sunt, quam divinitus afflati revelatione proprie tali et inspiratione immediata? Cesset ergo omnis controversia de hac veritate clare admodum in remotiori antiquitate fundata.
were designated by the name of prophets, were instruments through which the Word announced to men the divine will: For these Fathers, says Saint Hippolytus, fitted by the Spirit of prophecy, and worthily honoured by the Word Himself, so that like instruments they always had in themselves the united Word as a plectrum, by whose nod and breath the prophets announced the things which God willed. For they did not speak of their own power (2 Pet. 1:21), nor did they preach the things which were from their own mind; but first indeed duly imbued with wisdom by the divine power of the Word, thereafter through visions they were rightly foretaught the things which were to be in the future; and finally, with an already sure faith in the things, they spoke and preached those things which were manifest to them by the divine power alone, but hidden from the rest. For by what reason would he be called a prophet, unless in the Spirit he foresaw the things which are to be in the future?.... Whence fittingly the prophets from the beginning were called seers (1 Reg. 9:9). He subjoins this also, that the Word compelled these sacred writers to speak through the Holy Spirit; that the Word conversed in them, and spoke in them, announcing His own future incarnation: Now He, he speaks in this passage of the Son of God, gave the law and the prophets; and in giving them compelled them to speak through the Holy Spirit, that receiving the inspiration of the Father's power, they might announce the counsel and will of the Father. In them therefore the Word conversed, speaking of Himself. For already He was His own herald, and showed that it was to be that the Word would appear to men. What more efficacious can be said for the inspiration of the divine books? And who after these things will dare to enter into a disputation concerning the nature of this inspiration, namely whether it is immediate, or only mediate? Writers filled with the Spirit of prophecy; writers who are like instruments through which the Word announces the divine will; writers speaking not from themselves, but by divine wisdom and inspiration; writers, in a word, whom the Word compels to speak through the Holy Spirit, did they speak otherwise than divinely breathed upon by revelation properly so called and immediate inspiration? Let all controversy therefore cease concerning this truth very clearly founded in more remote antiquity.
Deus unus et trinus ex SS. litteris cognoscendus et colendus. Sacrae litterae non pro arbitratu exponendae. — Tandem docet hic sanctus Pater, quod non aliunde quam ex sacris litteris erudiamur de unitate Dei et Trinitate illius, quomodo eidem sit serviendum pietasque erga eum exercenda. Addit insuper
God one and triune to be known and worshipped from the sacred letters. The sacred letters not to be expounded at one's own pleasure. — Finally this holy Father teaches that from nowhere else than from the sacred letters are we instructed concerning the unity of God and His Trinity, and how He is to be served and piety towards Him exercised. He adds in
Editors' notes and page, col. 347
Footnotes
(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 347
S. Hippolyt., lib. De Antichrist., num. 2.
St Hippolytus, book On Antichrist, no. 2.
(printed under page 184)
(11) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 347
S. Hippolyt., lib. contra Noet., num. 11 et 12.
St Hippolytus, book Against Noetus, nos. 11 and 12.
(printed under page 184)
(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 347
S. Hippolyt., lib. contra Noet., num. 9.
St Hippolytus, book Against Noetus, no. 9.
(printed under page 184)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A prophetarum nomine designabantur,; B tur, nisi quae; C inspiratione dici potest?; D aliunde quam ex
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: prophetarum nomine designabantur,; in- split at column break
- other: the word insuper was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 348
sacras litteras non juxta proprium arbitrium esse interpretandas. En illius aureas de hac materia sententias : « Unus Deus est, quem non aliunde, fratres, agnoscimus quam ex sanctis Scripturis. Quemadmodum enim si quis vellet sapientiam hujus saeculi exercere, non aliter hoc consequi poterit, nisi dogmata philosophorum legat; sic quicunque volumus pietatem in Deum exercere, non aliunde discamus quam ex Scripturis divinis. Quaecunque ergo sanctae Scripturae praedicant, sciamus : et quaecunque docent, cognoscamus; et sicut vult Pater credi, sic credamus; et sicut vult Filium glorificari, sic glorificemus; et sicut vult donari Spiritum sanctum, sic accipiamus. Non secundum propriam voluntatem, neque secundum proprium sensum, neque vim inferentes in ea, quae ab eo data sunt; sed quomodo ipse per sanctas Scripturas docere voluit, sic intelligamus. »
addition that the sacred letters are not to be interpreted according to one's own pleasure. Behold his golden sentences on this subject: There is one God, whom we acknowledge from nowhere else, brethren, than from the holy Scriptures. For just as if anyone wished to practise the wisdom of this world, he will not be able to attain this otherwise than by reading the dogmas of the philosophers; so whoever of us wish to practise piety towards God, let us learn from nowhere else than from the divine Scriptures. Whatever things therefore the holy Scriptures preach, let us know; and whatever things they teach, let us acknowledge; and as the Father wills to be believed, so let us believe; and as He wills the Son to be glorified, so let us glorify Him; and as He wills the Holy Spirit to be bestowed, so let us receive Him. Not according to our own will, nor according to our own sense, nor doing violence to the things which have been given by Him; but in what manner He Himself willed to teach through the holy Scriptures, so let us understand.
Quomodo S. Hippolytus Scripturam alleget. — Caeterum S. Hippolytus communiter allegat Scripturarum sententias juxta versionem Septuaginta Interpretum. Aliquoties tamen nihilominus ad versiones super Hebraeum exemplar ab Aquila et Symmacho adornatas recurrit.
How Saint Hippolytus alleges Scripture. — For the rest, Saint Hippolytus commonly alleges the sentences of the Scriptures according to the version of the Seventy Interpreters. Several times, nevertheless, he has recourse to the versions prepared upon the Hebrew copy by Aquila and Symmachus.
Totam sacram Scripturam S. Hippolytus dividit in Νόμον, Προφήτας, Εὐαγγέλια, Ἀποστόλους, in Legem, Prophetas, Evangelia et Apostolos. Sic enim loquitur in libro De Antichristo : « Per omnia itaque lapsi sunt (Israelitae) et erraverunt, qui in nullo veritati concordes exstiterunt; nec in Lege, quod eam transgressi sunt; nec in Prophetis, quod prophetas quoque occiderunt; nec in Evangeliorum voce, quod et Salvatorem ipsum crucifixerunt; nec Apostolis credentes, quod et illos persecuti sunt; ubique veritati insidias nectentes, ejusque proditores, Dei magis odio ducti quam ejus ullo amore devoti. »
Saint Hippolytus divides the whole of Sacred Scripture into Νόμον, Προφήτας, Εὐαγγέλια, Ἀποστόλους, into the Law, the Prophets, the Gospels, and the Apostles. For thus he speaks in his book On Antichrist: Through all things therefore they (the Israelites) have lapsed and erred, who in nothing were in harmony with the truth; neither in the Law, because they transgressed it; nor in the Prophets, because they killed the prophets also; nor in the voice of the Gospels, because they crucified the Saviour Himself as well; nor believing the Apostles, because they persecuted them also; everywhere weaving snares for the truth, and betrayers of it, led rather by hatred of God than devoted by any love of Him.
Librum Sapientiae vetustus hic sanctus Pater attribuit Salomoni ita disserens : « Et ubinam est copiosissima illa (Salomonis) scientia? Ubi illa mysteria? Ubi libri? exstant enim sola Proverbia, et Sapientia, et Ecclesiastes, et Canticum canticorum. » Librum Tobiae semel allegat; historiam Susannae et Bel velut authenticum fragmentum agnoscit, atque insuper refert suppressisse Judaeos hoc Danielis caput tanquam illis invidiosum, et quo tantum scelus eorum, quos Babylone judices haberent,
This ancient holy Father attributes the Book of Wisdom to Solomon, discoursing thus: And where is that most copious knowledge (of Solomon)? Where are those mysteries? Where are the books? For there are extant only Proverbs, and Wisdom, and Ecclesiastes, and the Canticle of Canticles. He alleges the Book of Tobias once; he acknowledges the history of Susanna and Bel as an authentic fragment, and in addition reports that the Jews suppressed this chapter of Daniel as odious to them, and whereby so great a crime of those whom at Babylon they had as judges
Editors' notes and page, col. 348
Footnotes
(13) ‹anchor: Symmacho adornatas recurrit› · call in col 348
S. Hippolyti fragm. et excerpt. ex Commentario in Genesin ex 88 Patribus collecto. Tom. II Opp. apud Fabricium, pag. 22 et 26; et apud Galland., tom. II Biblioth. PP., pag. 477 et 480.
Fragments and excerpts of St Hippolytus from the Commentary on Genesis collected from 88 Fathers. Vol. II of the Works in Fabricius, pp. 22 and 26; and in Gallandi, vol. II of the Bibliotheca Patrum, pp. 477 and 480.
(printed under page 184)
(14) ‹anchor: De Antichristo› · call in col 348
S. Hippolyt., lib. De Antichristo, § 58, pag. 28; apud Fabric., tomo I Opp., et apud Galland., pag. 438, tom. II Biblioth. PP.
St Hippolytus, book On Antichrist, § 58, p. 28, in Fabricius, vol. I of the Works; and in Gallandi, p. 438, vol. II of the Bibliotheca Patrum.
(printed under page 184)
(15) ‹anchor: ita disserens› · call in col 348
Idem in Cantic., tom. I Opp., pag. 270, et tom. II, p. 4 et 5; et apud Galland., tom. cit., pag. 489.
The same, On the Song of Songs, vol. I of the Works, p. 270, and vol. II, pp. 4 and 5; and in Gallandi, the volume cited, p. 489.
(printed under page 184)
(16) ‹anchor: semel allegat› · call in col 348
Idem, lib. in Dan. et Susan., tom. I Opp., pag. 277, et apud Galland., pag. 446. Conf. Tobiae III, 24.
The same, book On Daniel and Susanna, vol. I of the Works, p. 277, and in Gallandi, p. 446. Compare Tobit 3:24.
(printed under page 184)
(17) ‹anchor: agnoscit› · call in col 348
Integrum enim, ut supra diximus, commentarium exaravit in historiam Susannae; alterum probatur ex his S. Hippolyti verbis: « Sed enim neque sapiens Daniel bis ex ore leonum ereptus, » etc. Sanctus Hippolytus, cum fateatur quod Daniel binis vicibus faucibus leonum traditus fuerit dilacerandus, necessario admisit historiam Beli, qua de causa hic propheta secunda vice rabiei harum ferocium bestiarum expositus fuit. Hippolyt., De tradit. apost., tom. I Opp., apud Fabric., pag. 247, et apud Galland., tom. cit., pag. 501.
For, as we said above, he wrote a whole commentary on the story of Susanna; the other is proved from these words of St Hippolytus: "But neither did wise Daniel, twice snatched from the mouth of the lions," etc. Since St Hippolytus acknowledges that Daniel was twice delivered to the jaws of lions to be torn apart, he necessarily accepted the story of Bel, for which reason this prophet was exposed a second time to the fury of those fierce beasts. Hippolytus, On the Apostolic Tradition, vol. I of the Works, in Fabricius, p. 247, and in Gallandi, the volume cited, p. 501.
(printed under page 184)
Page
- running head: SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A super sacras litteras; B que vim inferentes; C nullo veritati concordes; D scit, atque insuper
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: super sacras litteras; super split from previous column, habe- split at column break
detegeretur. Ad libros Machabaeorum provocat, atque ex primo et secundo Machabaeorum libro locum unum adducit. Caeterum de loco auctoris libri I Machabaeorum, ad quem S. Hippolytus respexisse videtur, quemque contra Gudium strenue astruit Combefisius, Annales Syriae Froelichianos vere aureos evolvere potissimum praestat, ipsorumque annalium vindicias, quarum eruditissimus auctor eumdem locum, sicut et reliqua egregie tuetur contra Wernsdorffium, qui Gudium sectatus, canonicam librorum Machabaicorum auctoritatem infringere irrito conatu aggressus est.
would be detected. He appeals to the books of the Machabees, and adduces one passage from the first and second book of the Machabees. For the rest, concerning the passage of the author of the first book of the Machabees to which Saint Hippolytus seems to have looked, and which Combefis strenuously maintains against Gudius, it is best of all to unroll the truly golden Annals of Syria of Froelich, and the vindications of the same annals, whose most learned author excellently defends the same passage, as also the rest, against Wernsdorff, who, following Gudius, attempted with vain effort to infringe the canonical authority of the Machabean books.
De libris deutero-canonicis N. T. — Gravis testis αὐθεντίας Evangelii et Apocalypsis S. Joannis est sanctus Hippolytus, quos libros suo tempore ab Alogis impugnari solitos singulari Apologia vindicavit, Apocalypsim vero etiam Commentario explanavit. Quid de caeteris Novi Testamenti libris, contradictionem expertis, senserit, ignoratur, nisi quod Epistolam Petri secundam alicubi spectaverit, Epistolam vero ad Hebraeos Pauli esse negaverit, ad exemplum scilicet S. Irenaei, magistri sui.
On the deuterocanonical books of the New Testament. — Saint Hippolytus is a weighty witness to the authenticity of the Gospel and the Apocalypse of Saint John, which books, wont in his time to be attacked by the Alogi, he vindicated in a special Apology, and the Apocalypse he also explained in a Commentary. What he thought concerning the rest of the books of the New Testament that experienced contradiction is unknown, except that he somewhere had regard to the Second Epistle of Peter, and denied that the Epistle to the Hebrews was Paul's, after the example namely of Saint Irenaeus, his master.
Dum S. Pater de Davide disserit, tradit quod illius Psalmi sint opus Spiritus sancti. Verisimile etiam est, quod sanctus hic episcopus crediderit
While the holy Father discourses concerning David, he hands down that his Psalms are the work of the Holy Spirit. It is probable also that this saintly bishop believed
Editors' notes and page, col. 349
Footnotes
(18) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 349
Hippolyt. in Susann., tom. I Opp., p. 274, apud Fabric.; et pag. 443 apud Galland.
Hippolytus, On Susanna, vol. I of the Works, p. 274, in Fabricius; and p. 443 in Gallandi.
(printed under page 185)
(19) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 349
« Sic namque etiam adversus Judaeos molitus est Antiochus illustris Syriae rex, Alexandri Macedonis nepos. Nam et ille per haec tempora corde elatus, decretum tulit, « aris prae foribus positis, cunctos immolaturos, atque hedera coronatos, Baccho circuituros. Qui nolint parere, hos cruciatibus atque tormentis examinatos, neci tradendos esse. » Verum is quoque, condigna a Domino justoque judice ac omnium inspectore Deo recepit praemia. Exesus enim vermibus, vita exemptus est. Ac si quis haec sigillatim legere velit singulaque lustrare, in libris Machabaeorum perscripta inveniet. » Lib. De Antichr., § 49. Confer. I Machab., I, 58, et II Machab. VI, 7.
"For thus too Antiochus the Illustrious, king of Syria, a descendant of Alexander of Macedon, schemed against the Jews. For he too, puffed up in heart in those times, issued a decree 'that altars be set before the doors, that all should sacrifice and, crowned with ivy, go in procession for Bacchus; and that those who would not obey should be tried by tortures and torments and handed over to death.' But he too received a fitting reward from the Lord, the just judge and God who sees all things. For he was eaten by worms and taken out of life. And if anyone wishes to read these things one by one and go over each, he will find them written in the books of the Maccabees." Book On Antichrist, § 49. Compare 1 Macc. 1:58 and 2 Macc. 6:7.
(printed under page 185)
(20) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 349
Froelich., Annal. Compend. Reg. Syr., Prolegom. pag. 31.
Frölich, Annales compendiarii regum Syriae, Prolegomena, p. 31.
(printed under page 185)
(21) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 349
Khell., Auctor. utriusque lib. Machab., pag. 173 et seq.
Khell, Auctoritas utriusque libri Machabaeorum, p. 173 ff.
(printed under page 185)
(22) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 349
Wernsdorff, Comment. histor. crit. de fid. hist. libror. Machab., pag. 40 et seq.
Wernsdorf, Commentatio historico-critica de fide historica librorum Maccabaicorum, p. 40 ff.
(printed under page 185)
(23) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 349
Ebed Jesu, in Catalogo scriptorum Syriacorum apud Assemannum Biblioth. Oriental., tom. III, p. I, pag. 15: « S. Hippolytus martyr et episcopus composuit apologiam pro Apocalypsi et Evangelio Joannis apostoli et evangelistae. » Etiam Hieronymus Opp. tom. IV, p. II, pag. 118, tradit Hippolytum scripsisse « de Daniele, de Apocalypsi. » Andreas vero et Arethas in praefat. Commentario in Apocalypsin Joannis praemissa Hippolytum in Apocalypsin commentatum esse, affirmant, pariterque Jacobus episcopus Edessenus; vide Ephraemi Syriaca Opera tom. I, pag. 192. Quinimo lib. De Antichr. 36 et 50, disertis verbis ipsemet Hippolytus dicit Apocalypsin a Joanne apostolo fuisse perscriptam.
Ebedjesu, in the Catalogue of Syriac writers, in Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis, vol. III, part I, p. 15: "St Hippolytus, martyr and bishop, composed an apology for the Apocalypse and Gospel of John, apostle and evangelist." Jerome too (Works vol. IV, part II, p. 118) reports that Hippolytus wrote "on Daniel, on the Apocalypse." Andrew and Arethas, in the prefaces set before their Commentaries on John's Apocalypse, affirm that Hippolytus commented on the Apocalypse, and so does Jacob, bishop of Edessa; see Ephrem's Syriac Works, vol. I, p. 192. Indeed in the book On Antichrist, 36 and 50, Hippolytus himself says in express words that the Apocalypse was written by John the apostle.
(printed under page 185)
(24) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 349
S. Hippolyt. lib. De Antich. cap. 2, dum ait, « non enim ex sua facultate loquebantur, » respexit II Petr. I, 21.
St Hippolytus, book On Antichrist, ch. 2, when he says, "for they did not speak by their own power," had 2 Pet. 1:21 in view.
(printed under page 185)
(25) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 349
Stephanus Gobarus apud Photium, Bibl., p. 904, 10: Ὅτι Ἱππόλυτος, καὶ Εἰρηναῖος τὴν πρὸς Ἑβραίους Ἐπιστολὴν Παύλου, οὐκ ἐκείνου εἶναί φασι. Cod. CCXXXII. Et ipse Photius cod. CXXI: « Habet et alia minus accurata, tum quod Paulum Epistolae ad Hebraeos auctorem esse negat. »
Stephen Gobar in Photius, Bibliotheca, p. 904, 10: "That Hippolytus and Irenaeus say the Epistle to the Hebrews ascribed to Paul is not his." Codex 232. And Photius himself, codex 121: "It has other things too that are less accurate, as that he denies that Paul is the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews."
(printed under page 185)
(26) ‹anchor: Spiritus sancti› · call in col 349
« Procedat igitur in medium, qui per Spiritum sanctum loquitur, et verax est, David filius Jesse. Hic cum quaedam prophetice de vero Christo caneret, et Deum nostrum per Spiritum sanctum canendo celebraret, omnia, quae a Judaeis [in] Passione ejus facta sunt, clare denuntiavit. » Hippolyt. Contra Judaeos, apud Fabric. Opp. tom. II, p. 2; et apud Galland. § 2, p. 448.
"Let him come forward, then, who speaks through the Holy Spirit and is truthful, David the son of Jesse. When he sang certain things prophetically of the true Christ, and celebrated our God in song through the Holy Spirit, he clearly foretold all that was done by the Jews [in] his Passion." Hippolytus, Against the Jews, in Fabricius, Works vol. II, p. 2; and in Gallandi, § 2, p. 448.
(printed under page 185)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A rent, detegeretur. Ad; B sanctus Hippolytus, quos; C (in footnote); D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: rent, detegeretur. Ad; rent split from previous column, credi- split at column break
prophetam Danielem in utero matris suae sanctificatum fuisse. Tandem observatu dignum est, quod S. Hippolytus allegando loca ex D. Pauli Epistolis persaepe usus fuerit nomine appellativo, dicendo, « Apostolus inquit, » pro « sanctus Paulus inquit. » Duabus insuper vicibus citat locum sub nomine alicujus prophetae, qui tamen in S. Scriptura nullibi reperitur.
that the prophet Daniel was sanctified in his mother's womb. Finally it is worthy of observation that Saint Hippolytus in alleging passages from the Epistles of Saint Paul very often used the appellative name, saying, The Apostle says, for Saint Paul says. Twice in addition he cites a passage under the name of a certain prophet, which nevertheless is nowhere found in Sacred Scripture.
ARTICULUS II.
Article 2.
DE TRADITIONE.
On Tradition.
Praeter auctoritatem librorum divinorum, sanctus Hippolytus etiam traditiones apostolorum suscipit ac veneratur. Auctoritate enim traditionum apostolicarum firmabat fidei Christianae articulos, et eadem hac traditione non sine ingenti utilitate adversus haereticos, praesertim Noetum, vetustus noster scriptor utebatur, ut ostendat, Verbum Dei e coelis descendisse in Virginis uterum, et ex ea incarnatum esse, assumpta anima humana, excepto peccato. « Credamus igitur, fratres, inquit ille, secundum traditionem apostolorum, κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀποστόλων, quod Deus Verbum e coelis descendit in sanctam Virginem Mariam. » In initio sui tractatus contra Noeti haeresim in favorem traditionis ita scribit hic sanctus episcopus : « Huic (Noeto) presbyteri responderunt : Et nos unum Deum vere scimus; scimus Christum,
Besides the authority of the divine books, Saint Hippolytus also receives and venerates the traditions of the apostles. For by the authority of the apostolic traditions he confirmed the articles of the Christian faith, and our ancient writer used this same tradition not without vast utility against the heretics, especially Noetus, to show that the Word of God descended from heaven into the womb of the Virgin, and was incarnate of her, having assumed a human soul, sin excepted. Let us believe therefore, brethren, says he, according to the tradition of the apostles, κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀποστόλων, that God the Word descended from heaven into the holy Virgin Mary. At the beginning of his treatise against the heresy of Noetus, this saintly bishop writes thus in favour of tradition: To him (Noetus) the presbyters replied: We too truly know one God; we know Christ,
Editors' notes and page, col. 350
Footnotes
(27) ‹anchor: sanctificatum fuisse› · call in col 350
« Quis haec loqui docuit, nisi qui ex utero matris te formavit? » Gudius putat legendum esse ἁγιάσας, « sanctificavit, » aut καλέσας, « vocavit. » Hippolyt., cap. 32 De Antichr. Observat in hunc locum cl. Combefisius, dicta haec in Jeremiam esse, unde nonnullis visum, ex utero sanctificatum esse et mundatum a peccato originali; quod illius singulare privilegium foret. Quod vero Hippolytus ad Danielem trahit, illique accommodat, non tam μνημονικὸν aliquid peccasse putandus est, quam veram et communem opinionem insinuasse: commune scilicet esse prophetis, ut et ministris evangelicis, sic ab utero a Deo formari et sanctificari, seu segregari in ministerium, ut Paulus loquitur, per gratiae praeparationem, non per ipsam ejus infusionem; in divina praedestinatione, non ipsa in tempore justificatione.
"Who taught you to say these things, if not he who formed you from your mother's womb?" Gudius thinks one should read having sanctified, "he sanctified," or having called, "he called." Hippolytus, ch. 32 On Antichrist. The distinguished Combefis observes on this passage that these words were said of Jeremiah, whence some have thought he was sanctified from the womb and cleansed from original sin, which would be his singular privilege. But in applying them to Daniel and fitting them to him Hippolytus should be thought not so much to have committed a slip of memory as to have hinted at a true and common opinion: namely, that it is common to the prophets, as to the ministers of the Gospel, to be thus formed and sanctified by God from the womb, or set apart for the ministry, as Paul says, through the preparation of grace, not through its actual infusion; in the divine predestination, not in justification itself in time.
(printed under page 185)
(28) ‹anchor: nullibi reperitur› · call in col 350
« Ast vero alius propheta: « Congregabit omnem virtutem suam a solis ortu usque ad occasum; quos vocaverit, et quos non vocaverit, cum illo ibunt. Candescere mare faciet prae multitudine velorum navium et nigrescere campum prae multitudine scutorum. Et si quis ei in praelio occurrit, gladio corruet. » Hipp., lib. De Antichr., cap. 15 et 54.
"But another prophet says: 'He will gather all his strength from the rising of the sun to its setting; those whom he has called and those whom he has not called will go with him. He will make the sea white with the multitude of the sails of ships, and the plain black with the multitude of shields. And whoever meets him in battle will fall by the sword.'" Hippolytus, book On Antichrist, chs. 15 and 54.
(printed under page 185)
(29) ‹anchor: inquit ille› · call in col 350
Hippolyt., Contra Noetum, cap. 17.
Hippolytus, Against Noetus, ch. 17.
(printed under page 185)
(30) ‹anchor: hic sanctus episcopus› · call in col 350
Idem ibid. cap. 1.
The same, ibid., ch. 1.
(printed under page 185)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A derit prophetam Danielem; B adversus haereticos, praesertim; C (in footnote); D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: derit prophetam Danielem; derit split from previous column
scilicet Filium, passum, sicut passus est; mortuum, sicut mortuus est; et suscitatum tertia die, et sedentem ad dexteram Patris, venturumque ad judicandum vivos et mortuos. Atque haec dicimus, quae didicimus. » Quid luculentius dicere potuisset hic sanctus Pater pro asserenda traditione apostolorum? Accedit his, quod integrum tractatum De apostolorum traditione exararit.
namely the Son, who suffered as He suffered; who died as He died; and who rose again on the third day, and sits at the right hand of the Father, and is to come to judge the living and the dead. And these things we say which we have learned. What more lucid could this holy Father have said for asserting the tradition of the apostles? Added to these things is the fact that he penned an entire treatise On the Tradition of the Apostles.
Conatur quidem haec argumenta pro traditione ex S. Hippolyto peti⟨t⟩a, alio loco ex sancto hoc Patre desumpto, Albertus Fabricius elidere. Locus autem S. Hippolyti ita sonat : « Unus Deus est, quem non aliunde, fratres, agnoscimus, quam ex sanctis Scripturis. Quemadmodum enim si quis vellet sapientiam hujus saeculi exercere, non aliter hoc consequi poterit, nisi dogmata philosophorum legat; sic quicunque volumus pietatem in Deum exercere, non aliunde discemus quam ex Scripturis divinis. » Visus est sibi Fabricius in hoc loco insigne de Scripturae sufficientia testimonium animadvertere. S⟨e⟩d traditionem a Scriptura non dissociat Hippolytus, dum pietatem « non aliunde » repetit, « quam ex Scripturis divinis. » Non enim aliam defendit contra haereticos interpretationem Scripturae, quam quae Ecclesiae traditione nitebatur. Quapropter verbis modo citatis paulo post haec addit : Μὴ κατ' ἰδίαν προαίρεσιν, μηδὲ κατ' ἴδιον νοῦν, μηδὲ βιαζόμενοι τὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ δεδομένα. « Non secundum propriam voluntatem, neque secundum proprium sensum, neque vim inferentes iis, quae a Deo data sunt. » Praeterea Noetum merito ejectum a presbyteris narrat c. 1, quod Ecclesiae tradi⟨t⟩ionem, quam ei objiciebant, contempserit. Dicebant enim Noeto p⟨r⟩esbyteri Ecclesiae : Ταῦτα λέγομεν ἃ ἐμάθομεν. « Haec dicimus, quae didicimus. » His adde, non dubium esse quin sanctus martyr in hoc adversus haereses opere, cujus materiam ex libris Irenaei mutuo sumpserat, traditionem et Ecclesiae auctoritatem Irenaei exemplo acerrime defenderit. Hinc item eliditur alterum ejusdem Fabricii hac ipsa de re commentum, quo iterum sibi finxit Hippolytum veluti Scripturae sufficientiam astruentem infra cap. 17, ubi sanctus Pater ad credendum κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀποστόλων, « secundum traditionem apostolorum, » fideles hortatur. Ibi namque, ne quis putet traditionem quoque praeter Scripturam sanctum martyrem admisisse, sollicite Fabricius haec adnotat : « Παράδοσιν ἀποστολικήν, sed quam mox ex scriptis apostolicis clarissime testatam facit Hippolytus. » Incassum laborat hic scholiastes. Siquidem sanctus
Albert Fabricius indeed endeavours to parry these arguments for tradition drawn from Saint Hippolytus by another passage taken from this holy Father. Now the passage of Saint Hippolytus runs thus: There is one God, whom we acknowledge from nowhere else, brethren, than from the holy Scriptures. For just as if anyone wished to practise the wisdom of this world, he will not be able to attain this otherwise than by reading the dogmas of the philosophers; so whoever of us wish to practise piety towards God, we shall learn from nowhere else than from the divine Scriptures. Fabricius seemed to himself to notice in this passage a notable testimony concerning the sufficiency of Scripture. But Hippolytus does not dissociate tradition from Scripture when he derives piety from nowhere else than from the divine Scriptures. For against the heretics he defends no other interpretation of Scripture than that which rested on the tradition of the Church. Wherefore to the words just cited he adds a little after these words: Not according to our own choice, nor according to our own mind, nor doing violence to the things given by God. Not according to our own will, nor according to our own sense, nor doing violence to the things which have been given by God. Besides, he narrates in chapter 1 that Noetus was deservedly cast out by the presbyters because he despised the tradition of the Church which they objected to him. For the presbyters of the Church said to Noetus: Ταῦτα λέγομεν ἃ ἐμάθομεν. These things we say which we have learned. Add to these things that there is no doubt that the holy martyr in this work Against Heresies, the material of which he had borrowed from the books of Irenaeus, most keenly defended tradition and the authority of the Church after the example of Irenaeus. Hence likewise is parried another comment of the same Fabricius on this very matter, whereby he again feigned to himself that Hippolytus builds up as it were the sufficiency of Scripture below in chapter 17, where the holy Father exhorts the faithful to believe κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀποστόλων, according to the tradition of the apostles. For there, lest anyone should think that the holy martyr admitted tradition also besides Scripture, Fabricius anxiously notes these words: Παράδοσιν ἀποστολικήν, but one which Hippolytus presently makes most clearly attested from the apostolic writings. In vain does this scholiast labour. Since indeed the holy
Editors' notes and page, col. 351
Footnotes
(31) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 351
S. Hippolyt., Contra Noetum, cap. 9.
St Hippolytus, Against Noetus, ch. 9.
(printed under page 186)
(32) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 351
S. Hippolyt., Contra Noetum, cap. 14.
St Hippolytus, Against Noetus, ch. 14.
(printed under page 186)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A scilicet Filium, passum,; B consequi poterit, nisi; C cundum proprium sensum,; D λων, « secundum traditionem
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: scilicet Filium, passum,
Pater lib. De Antichristo, cap. 1, Pauli apostoli exemplum secutus, qui Timotheum « ad depositum custodiendum, atque ad ea fidelibus hominibus commendanda, quae abs se per multas exhortationes audierat, » hortabatur; pari ratione Theophilum suum traditionem edocere comperitur.
Father in his book On Antichrist, chapter 1, following the example of Paul the Apostle, who exhorted Timothy to guard the deposit, and to commend to faithful men the things which he had heard from him through many exhortations (1 Tim. 6:20; 2 Tim. 2:2), is found in like manner to instruct his Theophilus in tradition.
ARTICULUS III.
Article 3.
DE MYSTERIO SANCTISSIMAE TRINITATIS.
On the Mystery of the Most Holy Trinity.
Unitas naturae et distinctio Personarum. — Castigatissime loquitur sanctus Hippolytus de mysterio sanctissimae Trinitatis, aperteque declarat fidem circa unitatem naturae et distinctionem Personarum. Sic autem ille ait in tractatu contra Noetum : « Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Quid ergo? Dicetne aliquis dicere Joannem duos Deos? Duos quidem non dicam (Deos), sed unum. Personas vero duas; oeconomiam tertiam, gratiam dico Spiritus sancti. » Gratiam appellat hoc loco Spiritum sanctum, quia divinus iste Spiritus est fons omnium donorum, quae Deus hominibus largitur. « Pater quidem unus (prosequitur S. Hippolytus), Personae vero duae, quia Filius; tertia autem Spiritus sanctus. Pater mandat, Verbum perficit; Filius autem ostenditur, per quem Pater creditur. Oeconomia consensionis redigitur ad unum Deum; unus enim est Deus, qui mandat, Pater; qui obedit, Filius; qui docet scientiam, Spiritus sanctus. » Nec quemquam morari debent haec verba : « qui obedit Filius, » quasi laederent perfectam consubstantialitatem Patris et Filii; nam, ut egregie animadvertit Pater Ceillierius, hisce loquendi formulis usi sunt Patres secundi et tertii saeculi, et quidem sine offensione; hac phrasi usus est S. Irenaeus absque ullo scrupulo; ac etsi hae formulae loquendi viderentur favere Arianae haeresi, nihilominus etiam post concilium Nicaenum in Patribus occurrunt, ut videre est in divo Basilio, divo Athanasio, et Mario Victorino. Quippe juxta stylum veterum theologorum, hae voces, « imperare et obedire, » quando de Personis divinis sermo est, non significant unam alteri imperare eo modo quo dominus famulo suo praecipit; sed designant solummodo consensionem voluntatis in Patre et Filio; non secus ac si quis diceret quod, cum Pater statuisset mundum condere per suum Verbum, id non fecit sine voluntate Verbi sui, quod est una eademque cum eo substantia; uti jam alio loco diximus, et modo fusius patebit.
Unity of nature and distinction of Persons. — Most accurately does Saint Hippolytus speak concerning the mystery of the most holy Trinity, and openly declares the faith concerning the unity of nature and the distinction of Persons. For thus he says in his treatise Against Noetus: The Word was with God, and the Word was God (John 1:1). What then? Will anyone say that John says two Gods? Two indeed I will not say (Gods), but one; yet two Persons, and a third economy, I mean the grace of the Holy Spirit. In this passage he calls the Holy Spirit grace, because that divine Spirit is the fountain of all gifts which God bestows upon men. The Father indeed is one (continues Saint Hippolytus), but there are two Persons, because there is the Son; and the third is the Holy Spirit. The Father commands, the Word performs; and the Son is manifested, through whom the Father is believed. The economy of harmony is reduced to one God; for there is one God: He who commands, the Father; He who obeys, the Son; He who teaches knowledge, the Holy Spirit. Nor ought these words, the Son who obeys, to detain anyone, as though they injured the perfect consubstantiality of the Father and the Son; for, as Father Ceillier excellently notices, the Fathers of the second and third centuries used these formulas of speaking, and indeed without offence; Saint Irenaeus used this phrase without any scruple; and although these formulas of speaking might seem to favour the Arian heresy, nevertheless they occur in the Fathers even after the Nicene Council, as may be seen in Saint Basil, Saint Athanasius, and Marius Victorinus. Since indeed according to the style of the ancient theologians, these words, to command and to obey, when the discourse is of the divine Persons, do not signify that the one commands the other in the manner in which a master enjoins his servant; but they designate only the harmony of will in the Father and the Son; no otherwise than if someone should say that, when the Father had determined to create the world through His Word, He did not do that without the will of His Word, which is one and the same substance with Him; as we have already said in another place, and will presently be more fully patent.
« Pater, pergit S. Hippolytus, est super omnia, Filius per omnia, Spiritus sanctus in omnibus. Aliter Deum unum intelligere non possumus, nisi
The Father, continues Saint Hippolytus, is above all things, the Son through all things, the Holy Spirit in all things (Eph. 4:6). Otherwise we cannot understand one God, unless
Editors' notes and page, col. 352
Footnotes
(33) ‹anchor: Pater Ceillierius› · call in col 352
Remi Ceillier, Hist. générale des auteurs, tom. II, pag. 366.
Remi Ceillier, Histoire générale des auteurs [sacrés et ecclésiastiques], vol. II, p. 366.
(printed under page 186)
(34) ‹anchor: ullo scrupulo› · call in col 352
Iren., lib. IV Adv. hæres. cap. 75.
Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book IV, ch. 75.
(printed under page 186)
(35) ‹anchor: divo Basilio› · call in col 352
Basil., lib. De Spiritu S., cap. 16.
Basil, On the Holy Spirit, ch. 16.
(printed under page 186)
(36) ‹anchor: divo Athanasio› · call in col 352
Athanas., orat. Contra gentes.
Athanasius, oration Against the Pagans.
(printed under page 186)
(37) ‹anchor: Mario Victorino› · call in col 352
Mar. Victorin., lib. I De rerum creatione.
Marius Victorinus, On the Creation of Things, book I.
(printed under page 186)
(38) ‹anchor: Verbi sui› · call in col 352
« Una enim virtus ex toto; totum vero Pater, ex quo virtus Verbum. » S. Hippolyt., Contra Noetum, num. 11.
"For there is one power from the whole; and the whole is the Father, from whom the power is the Word." St Hippolytus, Against Noetus, no. 11.
(printed under page 186)
(39) ‹anchor: in omnibus› · call in col 352
« Cum Paulus ait de Deo, Ephes. IV, 6 : « Qui « est super omnia, et per omnia, et in omnibus; » tres Personas designat, et unitatem Dei in illis : quia unius ejusdemque virtutis ac potentiæ est, esse super omnia, et per omnia, et in omnibus; et secundum ordinem confessionis sanctæ Trinitatis, primum tribuit Patri, secundum Filio, tertium Spiritui sancto; quia est tertia Persona secundum ordinem confessionis, ut antiqui theologi loquuntur, (continues)
"When Paul says of God, Eph. 4:6, 'Who is above all, and through all, and in all,' he designates three Persons, and the unity of God in them: for to be above all, and through all, and in all belongs to one and the same power and might; and according to the order of confession of the Holy Trinity he assigns the first to the Father, the second to the Son, the third to the Holy Spirit; because he is the third Person according to the order of confession, as the ancient theologians speak, (continues)
(printed under page 186)
Page
- running head: ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A Pater lib. De; B Deos? Duos quidem; C stantialitatem Patris et; D Pater statuisset mundum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Pater lib. De
vere Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui sancto credamus. Etenim Judaei Patrem glorificaverunt, sed non egerunt g⟨r⟩atias; siquidem non agnoverunt Filium. Discipuli agnoverunt Filium, sed non in Spiritu sancto; idcirco negaverunt. Sciens igitur Verbum Patris oeconomiam et voluntatem Patris, quod non vult aliter Pater glorificari, nisi sic; cum resurrexit, tradidit hoc discipulis : « Euntes, inquit, docete omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus sancti. » Docuit hic, quod quicunque unum quid horum omiserit, is perfecte D⟨e⟩um non glorificavit. Per hanc enim Trinitatem, διὰ τῆς Τριάδος, Pater glorificatur. Pater enim voluit, Filius fecit, Spiritus sanctus manifestum fecit. Necesse ergo est, ait sanctus hic episcopus, ut, quamvis nolit, confiteatur (Noetus) Patrem Deum omnipotentem, et Christum Jesum Filium Dei, Deum factum hominem, cui omnia Pater subjicit praeter se, et Spiritum sanctum, et hos vere esse tres. Quod si vult scire quomodo unus Deus demonstretur, sciat unam esse virtutem sive potentiam hujus. »
we truly believe in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. For the Jews glorified the Father, but did not give thanks, since they did not acknowledge the Son. The disciples acknowledged the Son, but not in the Holy Spirit; therefore they denied Him. The Word therefore, knowing the economy of the Father and the will of the Father, that the Father wills not to be glorified otherwise than thus, when He rose again, delivered this to the disciples: Going, He says, teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19). He taught here that whosoever omits any one of these has not perfectly glorified God. For through this Trinity, διὰ τῆς Τριάδος, the Father is glorified. For the Father willed, the Son did it, the Holy Spirit made it manifest. It is necessary therefore, says this saintly bishop, that, although he be unwilling, he (Noetus) confess the Father God Almighty, and Christ Jesus the Son of God, God made man, to whom the Father subjects all things besides Himself, and the Holy Spirit, and that these are truly three. But if he wishes to know how one God is demonstrated, let him know that the power or might of Him is one.
Sane nemo posset nostris hisce temporibus magis accurate loqui de mysterio sanctissimae Trinitatis, quam loquebatur S. Hippolytus, qui tertio Ecclesiae saeculo floruit. Perspicue revera adorabile hoc mysterium pertractatur, cum dicitur Patrem esse Deum, Filium esse Deum, Spiritum sanctum esse Deum; et nihilominus unum solum esse Deum, quia tres istae Personae, etsi vere ab invicem distinctae, sunt una eademque virtus, sive potentia, ideoque unus et idem Deus. Hoc uno S. Hippolyti pulch⟨e⟩rrimo testimonio tum Arii, tum Sabellii impietas profligatur. Tres sunt divinae Personae, sed unus Deus sunt : en totum sanctissimae Trinitatis mysterium. Notante insuper cl. Marano paulo ante, cap. nimirum 8, sanctus Hippolytus dixerat unum Deum esse secundum virtutem, sive secundum essentiam divinam, quae una prorsus est in tribus Personis; secundum autem oeconomiam tres Personas ostendi : intelligit ergo, ut Tertullianus, oeconomiae nomine, « numerum et dispositionem Trinitatis. » Hoc autem loco gratiam Spiritus sancti appellat « tertiam oeconomiam; » sed eodem sensu ac Tertullianus, qui Spiritum sanctum appellat « tertium gradum. » Nam gradus, forma, species, dispositio sive oeconomia, idem sonant apud Tertullianum. Quare si Spiritus sanctus
Assuredly no one could in these our times speak more accurately concerning the mystery of the most holy Trinity than Saint Hippolytus spoke, who flourished in the third century of the Church. Clearly in truth is this adorable mystery treated when it is said that the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God; and nevertheless that there is one only God, because those three Persons, although truly distinct from one another, are one and the same power or might, and therefore one and the same God. By this one most beautiful testimony of Saint Hippolytus the impiety both of Arius and of Sabellius is routed. There are three divine Persons, but they are one God: behold the whole mystery of the most holy Trinity. Moreover, as the illustrious Maran notes, a little before, namely in chapter 8, Saint Hippolytus had said that there is one God according to power, or according to the divine essence, which is altogether one in the three Persons; while according to the economy three Persons are manifested: he understands therefore, like Tertullian, by the name of economy, the number and disposition of the Trinity. Now in this passage he calls the grace of the Holy Spirit the third economy; but in the same sense as Tertullian, who calls the Holy Spirit the third degree. For degree, form, species, disposition or economy, mean the same thing in Tertullian. Wherefore if the Holy Spirit
Editors' notes and page, col. 353
Footnotes
(40) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 353
Non potest, notante cl. Marano lib. IV De divinitate J. C., pag. 458, accuratius dogma Christianorum exponi. Non solum enim numerum Personarum nihil de Dei singularitate detrahere contendit; sed etiam ipsam Dei singularitatem sine hoc Personarum numero nec consistere, nec coli posse docet.
As the distinguished Maran notes (On the Divinity of Jesus Christ, book IV, p. 458), the Christians' doctrine could not be set out more exactly. For he not only maintains that the number of the Persons takes nothing from God's oneness, but teaches that God's very oneness can neither subsist nor be worshipped without this number of Persons.
(printed under page 187)
(41) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col 353
Hippolyt. loc. cit., num. 8.
Hippolytus, in the place cited, no. 8.
(printed under page 187)
(42) ‹anchor: cl. Marano› · call in col 353
Prudent. Maran., De divinitate J. C., lib. IV, p. 457.
Prudentius Maran, On the Divinity of Jesus Christ, book IV, p. 457.
(printed under page 187)
(43) ‹anchor: Tertullianus› · call in col 353
Tertull. adv. Praxeam, cap. 3.
Tertullian, Against Praxeas, ch. 3.
(printed under page 187)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A vere Patri, et; B pus, ut, quamvis; C que virtus, sive; D sanctum appellat « tertium
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: vere Patri, et; san- split at column break
dicitur tertius gradus, dici etiam potest tertia dispositio, sive oeconomia. Minus accurate in Latina interpretatione incarnatio « oeconomiae » nomine designatur, in his verbis, quae leguntur c. 3 : Τίς γὰρ οὐκ ἐρεῖ ἕνα Θεὸν εἶναι; ἀλλ' οὐ τὴν οἰκονομίαν ἀναιρήσει. « Quis enim non dicet unum esse Deum? non tamen continuo oeconomiam (id est incarnationem) negabit. » Non incarnationem, sed numerum et dispositionem Trinitatis considerat S. Hippolytus hoc in loco, et pluribus in aliis.
is called the third degree, He can also be called the third disposition, or economy. Less accurately in the Latin translation is the incarnation designated by the name of economy, in these words which are read in chapter 3: Τίς γὰρ οὐκ ἐρεῖ ἕνα Θεὸν εἶναι; ἀλλ' οὐ τὴν οἰκονομίαν ἀναιρήσει. For who will not say that God is one? Yet he will not straightway deny the economy (that is, the incarnation). Not the incarnation, but the number and disposition of the Trinity does Saint Hippolytus consider in this passage, and in several others.
ARTICULUS IV.
Article 4.
DE DIVINITATE FILII ET CONSUBSTANTIALITATE VERBI.
On the Divinity of the Son and the Consubstantiality of the Word.
Divinitas Filii. — Pari praecisione loquitur sanctus iste episcopus ac martyr de divinitate ac consubstantialitate Verbi in particulari; et ex illo innumera eruuntur testimonia, quae Arianorum ac Socinianorum os obstruere valent. Habe modo notabiliora. In libro contra Noetum Christi divinitatem diserte profitetur, dum ad illud Apostoli Rom. IX, 15 : « Quorum patres, ex quibus Christus secundum carnem, » etc., ita eloquitur : « Pulchre enarrat, et dilucide mysterium veritatis. Hic, qui est super omnia, Deus est (sic enim audet dicere : (Omnia mihi tradita sunt a Patre). Qui est super omnia Deus benedictus, genitus est; et factus homo, Deus est in saecula. » (Sic.) Et rursus paulo infra : « Necesse ergo est, ut quamvis nolit, confiteatu⟨r⟩ Deum omnipotentem, et Christum Jesum Dei Filium, Deum factum hominem... et Spiritum sanctum; et hos esse vere tres, καὶ τούτους εἶναι οὕτως τρία. »
Divinity of the Son. — With like precision does this saintly bishop and martyr speak concerning the divinity and consubstantiality of the Word in particular; and from him innumerable testimonies are drawn out, which avail to stop the mouth of the Arians and Socinians. Take now the more notable ones. In the book Against Noetus he expressly professes the divinity of Christ, when upon that text of the Apostle, Romans 9:5: Whose are the fathers, of whom is Christ according to the flesh, etc., he speaks thus: Finely does he narrate, and clearly, the mystery of the truth. He who is over all things is God; for thus He dares to say: All things are delivered to Me by the Father (Matt. 11:27). He who is God blessed over all things has been born; and having been made man, He is God for ever. (Thus.) And again a little below: It is necessary therefore that, although he be unwilling, he confess God Almighty, and Christ Jesus the Son of God, God made man... and the Holy Spirit; and that these are truly three, καὶ τούτους εἶναι οὕτως τρία.
Coaeternus Patri est Filius. — Generationem aeternam et consubstantialitatem Filii cum Patre sequentia ostendunt sancti Hippolyti verba : « Deus, solus cum esset (ante creationem) nihilque sibi coaevum haberet, voluit mundum efficere, ac mundum cogitans ac volens, et dicens effecit; continuoque exstitit ei factus, sicut voluit, et sicut voluit, perfecit. Satis igitur nobis est scire solum, nihil esse Deo coaevum. Nihil erat praeter ipsum; ipse solus, multus erat. Nec enim erat sine ratione, sine sapientia, sine potentia, sine consilio. Omnia erant in eo : ipse erat omnia. Quando voluit, et quomodo voluit, ostendit Verbum suum temporibus apud eum definitis; per quod omnia fecit...
The Son is coeternal with the Father. — The following words of Saint Hippolytus show the eternal generation and consubstantiality of the Son with the Father: God, when He was alone (before the creation) and had nothing coeval with Himself, willed to make the world, and thinking and willing and speaking the world, He made it; and straightway it existed for Him as made, as He willed, and as He willed, He perfected it. It is enough therefore for us to know only that nothing is coeval with God. Nothing was besides Him; He Himself alone, was many. For He was neither without reason, without wisdom, without power, without counsel. All things were in Him: He Himself was all things. When He willed, and how He willed, He manifested His Word at times defined with Him; through which He made all things...
Editors' notes and page, col. 354
Footnotes
(44) ‹anchor: ita eloquitur› · call in col 354
Lib. Contra Noet., num. 6.
The book Against Noetus, no. 6.
(printed under page 187)
(45) ‹anchor: paulo infra› · call in col 354
Idem ibid., num. 8.
The same, in the same place, no. 8.
(printed under page 187)
(46) ‹anchor: Hippolyti verba› · call in col 354
S. Hippolyt., loc. cit., num. 10.
St Hippolytus, in the place cited, no. 10.
(printed under page 187)
(47) ‹anchor: omnia fecit› · call in col 354
Hæc et sequentia mirum in modum explanat simul et strenue tuetur contra Jurium doctissimus Bossuetus Meldensis episcopus, Avertiss. VI, § 68, Sur les lettres de Jurieu. Œuvres tom. IV, p. 373 et seq. Ait nimirum cl. Bossuetus sanctum Hippolytum non tantum seipsum luculenter in catholico sensu declarare, sed etiam modum suppeditare, quo alia similia SS. Patrum testimonia, quæ obscuriora apparent, dilucide exponantur. Cum enim in loco citato dicat : « Quod Verbum, cum in se haberet, essetque mundo creato inaspectabile, emittens priorem vocem, et lumen ex lumine ge- (continues)
These words and those that follow are wonderfully explained and at the same time vigorously defended against Jurieu by the most learned Bossuet, bishop of Meaux, Avertissement VI, § 68, On the letters of Jurieu, Works vol. IV, p. 373 ff. The distinguished Bossuet says, namely, that St Hippolytus not only declares himself clearly in a Catholic sense, but also supplies the means by which other similar testimonies of the holy Fathers, which seem more obscure, may be clearly explained. For since he says in the place cited: "Which Word, since he had it in himself and it was invisible to the created world, sending forth the first utterance, and begetting light from light (continues)
(printed under page 187)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A ctus dicitur tertius; B Divinitas Filii. —; C omnipotentem, et Christum; D erant in eo :
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: ctus dicitur tertius; ctus split from previous column
Eorum autem quae facta sunt, ducem, consiliarium et operarium generabat Verbum; quod Verbum cum in se haberet, essetque mundo creato inaspectabile, fecit aspectabile, emittens priorem vocem; et lumen ex lumine generans, deprompsit ipsi creaturae Dominum, sensum suum : et qui prius ipsi tantum erat visibilis, mundo autem invisibilis, hunc visibilem facit, ut mundus, cum eum, qui apparuit, videret, salvus fieri posset. »
And of the things which were made, He begot the Word as leader, counsellor, and workman; which Word, when He had it in Himself, and it was invisible to the created world, He made visible, sending forth the prior voice; and begetting light from light, He brought forth as Lord to the creation itself His own mind: and Him who previously was visible to Himself alone, but invisible to the world, He makes visible, that the world, seeing Him who appeared, might be able to be saved.
Hoc loco divi Hippolyti abutitur Sandius; dum ex eo ostendere conatur, sanctum nostrum episcopum docuisse, Filium paulo ante mundum conditum exsistere coepisse. Verum doctissimus Bullus eumdem locum ab interpretamentis Sandii egregie vindicat ita disserens : « Agnosco quidem, hic ab Hippolyto generationem quamdam Verbo sive Filio Dei tribui, quo mundi creationem proxime antecesserit. Sed omnino nego de generatione loqui Hippolytum proprie dicta, quae scilicet Verbi fuerit productio, quave Verbum ipsum, cum prius non exsisteret, exsistere coepit. Huic commento totus Hippolyti sermo repugnat. Nam Deum ex aeterno ita « solum » fuisse docet, ut interim « multum » fuisse affirmet. Quomodo? Quia scilicet Deus Pater nunquam erat sine ratione (τῷ Λόγῳ) et sapientia, hoc est, sine Filio et Spiritu sancto; proinde non sine consilio, cum utrumque sibi consiliarium habuerit. Nullus dubito, quin hic sit sensus genuinus istorum Hippolyti verborum : Nihil erat praeter ipsum; ipse solus multus erat, Nec enim erat sine ratione (procul dubio Graece scripserat Hippolytus τῷ Λόγῳ), sine sapientia, sine consilio. Quippe Deum agnovisse Hippolytum unum et multum, hoc est trinum; unum essentia, trinum Personis, ipse hujus homiliae titulus declarat. Tertiam autem divinitatis hypostasin « Sapientiae » nomine appellavit Hippolytus, Irenaei, cujus auditor fuisse perhibetur, exemplo et ex more illorum temporum. Deinde ait Hippolytus, Deum generasse Verbum, quod ab aeterno in se habuerit. Quomodo? « Ipsum, inquit, temporibus apud se definitis ostendit : ipsum creaturae ut Dominum, deprompsit : ipsum denique sibimet soli prius notum, mundo visibilem fecit. » Itaque generatio, qua de loquitur Hippolytus, non est Verbi productio; sed ipsius ex aeterno Patri coexsistentis, ostensio, depromptio, et manifestatio, quae res creatas respexerit. Ut idem prorsus voluerit beatissimus
Sandius abuses this passage of Saint Hippolytus, while from it he endeavours to show that our saintly bishop taught that the Son began to exist a little before the foundation of the world. Yet the most learned Bull excellently vindicates the same passage from the perversions of Sandius, discoursing thus: I acknowledge indeed that here a certain generation is attributed by Hippolytus to the Word or Son of God, whereby He immediately preceded the creation of the world. But I altogether deny that Hippolytus speaks of generation properly so called, which namely was the production of the Word, or whereby the Word Himself, when previously He did not exist, began to exist. To this figment the whole discourse of Hippolytus is repugnant. For he teaches that God from eternity was so alone that meanwhile he affirms Him to have been many. How? Because namely God the Father was never without reason (τῷ Λόγῳ) and wisdom, that is, without the Son and the Holy Spirit; accordingly not without counsel, since He had both as counsellor to Himself. I have no doubt that this is the genuine sense of those words of Hippolytus: Nothing was besides Him; He Himself alone was many, For He was not without reason (without doubt in Greek Hippolytus had written τῷ Λόγῳ), without wisdom, without counsel. Since indeed the very title of this homily declares that Hippolytus acknowledged God as one and many, that is triune; one in essence, triune in Persons. Moreover Hippolytus called the third hypostasis of the divinity by the name of Wisdom, after the example of Irenaeus, whose hearer he is reported to have been, and according to the custom of those times. Next Hippolytus says that God begot the Word which He had in Himself from eternity. How? He manifested Him, he says, at times defined with Himself: He brought Him forth as Lord to the creation: finally He made Him, previously known to Himself alone, visible to the world. Therefore the generation of which Hippolytus speaks is not the production of the Word; but the manifestation, bringing forth, and showing of Him coexisting from eternity with the Father, which had regard to created things. So that the most blessed
Editors' notes and page, col. 355
Footnotes
(50) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Sand. Nuclei hist. ecclesiast. lib. I, p. 98.
Sand, Nucleus historiae ecclesiasticae, book I, p. 98.
(printed under page 188)
(51) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Bull., Defens. fid. Nicæn., sect. III, cap. 8, pag. 219 et seq. Cf. Bossuet., l. c.; neque aliter Maranus De divinit. J. C. lib. IV, cap. 13, § 3, p. 458.
Bull, Defence of the Nicene Faith, section III, ch. 8, p. 219 ff. Compare Bossuet, in the place cited; and Maran no differently, On the Divinity of Jesus Christ, book IV, ch. 13, § 3, p. 458.
(printed under page 188)
(52) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Contra Beron. et Helic., apud Fabric. tom. I Opp. Hippolyt., p. 226, et apud Galland., p. 466.
Against Beron and Helix, in Fabricius, vol. I of Hippolytus's Works, p. 226, and in Gallandi, p. 466.
(printed under page 188)
(53) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Ibid.
In the same place.
(printed under page 188)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A Eorum autem quae; B quidem, hic ab; C Nihil erat praeter; D de loquitur Hippolytus,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Eorum autem quae
martyr, quod Athenagoram docuisse supra ostendimus. Atqui in hunc sensum ut Hippolytum interpretemur, suadent quidem ipsa loci allati verba; sed eo plane nos cogunt alia ejus scripta, in quibus coaeternam Filii cum Patre exsistentiam verbis veluti solis radio descriptis declarat. »
martyr meant the very same thing that we have shown above that Athenagoras taught. And indeed the very words of the passage adduced persuade us to interpret Hippolytus in this sense; but his other writings altogether compel us thereto, in which he declares the coeternal existence of the Son with the Father in words written as it were with a sunbeam.
Sed multo luculentiora perfectae, ac verae divinitatis in Filio, ejusque Persona a Patre distincta S. Hippolytus testimonia dedit in opusculis Contra Beronem et Helicem, apud Anastasium. In quibus duplicem in Christo naturam accurate discernit; et divinam eamdem plane esse demonstrat, quae est in Patre. « Verbum enim Dei nulla re mutatum esse, » dicit eo ipso, quod carnem induit; « nec in ullo prorsus, in quo idem est cum Patre, factum esse idem cum carne propter exinanitionem. Sed cujusmodi erat absque carne, ita mansisse extra omnem circumscriptionem. » Rursus : « Deum illum infinitum simul, et circumscriptum hominem esse » ait, « et intelligi, utriusque substantiam perfecte perfectam habentem. » Quod potest esse clarius summae, absolutaeque divinitatis in Christo praeconium? Nam et infinitum Deum hunc esse praedicat, et immensum, et immutabilem, et idem omnino cum Patre, quod ad naturam attinet, cum sit ejus Filius, ideoque reipsa distinctus. Denique : « Divinitas (inquit ex Anastasii versione), ut erat ante incarnationem, et est post incarnationem secundum naturam infinita, incomprehensibilis, impassibilis, incomparabilis (imo inalterabilis), inconvertibilis, per se potens, et ut totum dicamus, subsistens substantialis sola infinitae virtutis bonum. » Potuitne vel hoc saeculo quisquam disertius, expressius significantiusque divinitatem Filii, ac Personarum discrimen exponere, quam scriptor ille fecit antiquus, antequam Nicaenus consessus liquidam ea de re sententiam explicasset? His sunt consentanea testimonia reliquorum fragmentorum (sunt autem octo omnino) de Christo Deo, Deique Filio dicta, quae longum sit exscribere. Ut cum in secundo nominatur ὁ τῶν ὅλων Θεός, « Deus universorum, » et in sexto tribuitur illi « imprincipalitas, infactio, infinitas, sempiternitas, incomprehensibilitas, » et quaecunque « horum secundum magnitudinem theologica amplissima in Deitate ratio contemplatur, » ut barbare vertit Anastasius.
But much more lucid testimonies of the perfect and true divinity in the Son, and of His Person distinct from the Father, did Saint Hippolytus give in his short works Against Beron and Helix, in Anastasius. In which he accurately discerns the twofold nature in Christ; and demonstrates that the divine is altogether the same as that which is in the Father. For the Word of God was changed in nothing, he says, by the very fact that He put on flesh; nor in anything at all wherein He is the same with the Father did He become the same with the flesh on account of the emptying (Phil. 2:7). But such as He was without the flesh, so He remained beyond all circumscription. Again: That He is at once infinite God and circumscribed man, he says, and is understood as having the substance of both perfectly perfect. What clearer proclamation can there be of the supreme and absolute divinity in Christ? For he preaches that He is both infinite God, and immense, and immutable, and altogether the same with the Father as regards nature, while He is His Son, and therefore in reality distinct. Finally: The Divinity (says he according to the version of Anastasius), as it was before the incarnation, is also after the incarnation infinite according to nature, incomprehensible, impassible, incomparable (nay rather unalterable), inconvertible, powerful of itself, and to say all, the subsisting substantial sole good of infinite power. Could anyone even in this century have expounded more eloquently, more expressly, and more significantly the divinity of the Son and the distinction of Persons than that ancient writer did before the Nicene assembly had unfolded its clear sentence on that matter? Agreeable to these are the testimonies of the remaining fragments (and there are eight in all) spoken concerning Christ as God and the Son of God, which it would be long to transcribe. As when in the second He is named ὁ τῶν ὅλων Θεός, the God of all things, and in the sixth there is attributed to Him beginninglessness, uncreatedness, infinity, eternity, incomprehensibility, and whatever things of these according to greatness the most ample theological reason contemplates in the Deity, as Anastasius barbarously translates.
Editors' notes and page, col. 356
Footnotes
(54) ‹anchor: virtutis bonum› · call in col 356
Ibid.
In the same place.
(printed under page 188)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A martyr, quod Athenagoram; B prorsus, in quo; C cundum naturam infinita,; D incomprehensibilitas, » et
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: martyr, quod Athenagoram
Apud Theodoretum etiam haec D. Hippolyti verba leguntur ex sermone de Helcana et Anna, cum de eo, quod Maria gestabat in utero, loquitur : « Verbum erat Dei primogenitum e coelo ad te delapsum, et homo primogenitus in utero formatus; ut primogenitum Verbum Dei primogenito conjunctum homini monstretur. » Horum vis verborum quanta sit, melius existimabit, qui nominum istorum, « Verbi, » et « primogeniti » potestatem expenderit. Etenim Λόγον ejusmodi intellexit Hippolytus, de quo Joannes initio Evangelii loquitur. At Λόγος iste « Deus, et apud Deum in principio » exstitit; et « per eum omnia sunt facta. » Non igitur creatus est, neque per alium Λόγον factus, ut Ariani postea fabulati sunt, eo ipso, quod primogenitus est. Ad haec idem Hippolytus in alio libro Κύριον ἀναμάρτητον vocat Christum, id est impeccabilem; quod solius verae, et increatae Divinitatis proprium est.
In Theodoret also these words of Saint Hippolytus are read from the sermon on Elcana and Anna, when he speaks of that which Mary bore in her womb: The Word was the firstborn of God glided down from heaven to you, and the firstborn man formed in the womb; that the firstborn Word of God may be shown joined to the firstborn man. How great is the force of these words he will better judge who weighs the power of those names, the Word, and the firstborn. For Hippolytus understood such a Λόγον as John speaks of at the beginning of the Gospel. Now that Λόγος existed as God, and with God in the beginning; and through Him all things were made (John 1:1–3). Therefore He was not created, nor made through another Λόγον, as the Arians afterwards fabled, by the very fact that He is the firstborn. In addition to these things the same Hippolytus in another book calls Christ Κύριον ἀναμάρτητον, that is impeccable; which is proper to the sole true and uncreated Divinity.
Alia satis clara pro deitate Christi testimonia Hippolyti habentur inter plura ejus dicta a Theodoreto dialogo 2, tom. IV, pag. 88, et act. V concilii Lateranensis sub Martino I, anno 649, tom. X Concilior., edit. Mansi, pag. 1079 allegata. Notatu quoque digna sunt ejusdem Hippolyti verba ex interpretatione psalmi II a Theodoreto adducta. Christum Deum appellavit sermone in Helcanam et Annam.
Other sufficiently clear testimonies of Hippolytus for the deity of Christ are found among several sayings of his alleged by Theodoret in dialogue 2, tome 4, page 88, and in act 5 of the Lateran Council under Martin I, in the year 649, tome 10 of the Councils, Mansi's edition, page 1079. Worthy of note also are the words of the same Hippolytus adduced by Theodoret from the interpretation of Psalm 2. He called Christ God in the sermon on Elcana and Anna.
Divinae omni-praesentiae etiam attributum Christo ascripsit tractatu in Pascha, ex quo haec citato Concilior. tomo, col. 1087, habentur verba : « Totus erat in omnibus et ubique, adimplens vero omnia, ad omnes aerios principatus nudus redispoliatus (sic) est, et ad parvum clamat transire calicem, ut ostendat vere, quia et homo erat. » Nota quoque dictum, ut egregie hic animadvertit Grabius, « et homo; » quoniam scilicet aliam insuper naturam habebat, et Deus erat.
He ascribed the attribute of divine omnipresence also to Christ in his treatise On Easter, from which in the cited tome of the Councils, column 1087, these words are found: He was whole in all things and everywhere, and filling all things, before all the aerial principalities He was stripped naked (thus), and for a little while He cries out that the chalice may pass (Matt. 26:39), that He may truly show that He was also man. Note also the saying, as Grabe excellently notices here, also man; since namely He had another nature in addition, and was God.
Accedunt alia quoque ejusdem Hippolyti verba ex ejus in Genesim commentario. Et periit iste quidem commentarius; asservata tamen sunt quaedam ejus fragmenta in Catenis, quae vulgo dici solent, Patrum in dictum Moysis librum; quorum
Added to these are other words also of the same Hippolytus from his commentary on Genesis. And that commentary indeed has perished; nevertheless certain fragments of it have been preserved in what are commonly wont to be called the Catenae of the Fathers on the said book of Moses; of which
Editors' notes and page, col. 357
Footnotes
(1) ‹anchor: sunt facta› · call in col 357
Joan. I, 1-3.
John 1:1-3.
(printed under page 189)
(2) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Philip. II, 7, 8.
Philippians 2:7-8.
(printed under page 189)
(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Ibid., 9.
The same, 2:9.
(printed under page 189)
(55) ‹anchor: Theodoretum etiam› · call in col 357
Theodoret. Dialog., 1, tom. IV Opp., edit. Sirmond.
Theodoret, Dialogue 1, Works vol. IV, Sirmond's edition.
(printed under page 189)
(56) ‹anchor: Theodoreto adducta› · call in col 357
Theodoret. Dialog., 2, Opp., tom. IV, pag. 89, apud Fabric., pag. 268, et apud Galland., pag. 486.
Theodoret, Dialogue 2, Works vol. IV, p. 89; in Fabricius, p. 268, and in Gallandi, p. 486.
(printed under page 189)
(57) ‹anchor: et Annam› · call in col 357
Theodoret., loc. cit., et apud Fabric., pag. 267; apud Galland., 496.
Theodoret, in the place cited, and in Fabricius, p. 267; in Gallandi, 496.
(printed under page 189)
(58) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Ex Commentario S. Hippolyti in benedictiones Balaami haec citavit Leontius lib. I Contra Nestorium et Eutychen : « Ut demonstretur utramque quidem in se habere substantiam, scilicet Dei et hominum, sicut Apostolus ait : Mediator quidem Dei et hominum homo Christus Jesus (I Tim. II, 5); Mediator autem unius hominis non est (Gal. III, 20), sed hominum : oportebat ergo ut Christus, factus mediator Dei et hominum, ab utrisque arrhabonem quemdam acciperet, ut appareat mediator duarum naturarum. »
Leontius, Against Nestorius and Eutyches book I, cited this from St Hippolytus's Commentary on the blessings of Balaam: "That he may be shown to have in himself both substances, namely of God and of men, as the Apostle says: For there is one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1 Tim. 2:5); now a mediator is not of one man (Gal. 3:20), but of men. It was fitting, then, that Christ, made mediator of God and men, should receive a kind of pledge from both, so that he might appear as the mediator of two natures."
(printed under page 189)
Page
- running head: DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A Apud Theodoretum etiam; B ipso, quod primogenitus; C Concilior. tomo, col.; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin, with Greek words printed (Λόγον, Λόγος, Κύριον ἀναμάρτητον); editors' matter: Apud Theodoretum etiam
aliqua Romae descripta Isaacus Vossius quondam doctissimo D. Joanni Millio, hic vero cl. Grabio communicavit. Atqui inter haec in XLIX caput, vers. 22, υἱὸς ηὐξημένος Ἰωσήφ, sequentia habentur verba : « Quandoquidem unigenitum Dei Verbum Deus ex Deo exsistens (observa ipsius concilii Nicaeni phrasin, uti supra lumen de lumine) exinanivit semetipsum juxta Scripturas, demittens semetipsum ultro in id quod non erat, et vilem hancce carnem induit, atque in servi forma apparuit, obediens Deo et Patri factus usque ad mortem, eapropter de caetero et superexaltatus esse legitur; et tanquam id proprie non habens propter humanam naturam, ac gratuiti instar doni accepit nomen super omne nomen, secundum B. Pauli verba, sed ex rei veritate; res ipsa tamen non erat donum eorum quae ab initio naturaliter haud habuit (longe se res habet); verum potius reditus existimandus est, et recursus ad id quod a principio essentialiter et inseparabiliter ei inerat. » Et paulo post ad ista verba, εὐλογίας πατρὸς καὶ μητρός, ita commentatur : « Clare atque manifeste ea pariter, quae est ex Deo, et Patre generatio Unigeniti, ac quae per sanctam Virginem facta est, indicatur, juxta quam creditur et visus est homo. Filius enim Dei et Patris naturaliter atque vere exsistens, propter nos sustinuit eam, quae fuit per Virginem atque uterum generationem, et ubera suxit. Neque enim, ut quibusdam videtur, putative fuit homo, sed idem vere apparuit, quod nos sumus, qui naturae leges sequimur, et nutrimento usus est, quamvis ipse mundo vitam daret. »
some transcribed at Rome Isaac Vossius formerly communicated to the most learned Doctor John Mill, and he to the illustrious Grabe. And among these on chapter 49, verse 22, Joseph is a growing son (Gen. 49:22), the following words are found: Since indeed the only-begotten Word of God, existing as God from God (observe the phrase of the Nicene Council itself, as above light from light), emptied Himself according to the Scriptures, letting Himself down of His own accord into that which He was not, and put on this vile flesh, and appeared in the form of a servant, becoming obedient to God and the Father unto death (Phil. 2:7–8), wherefore for the rest He is also read to have been superexalted; and as though not having that properly on account of the human nature, and after the manner of a gratuitous gift He received a name above every name (Phil. 2:9), according to the words of Blessed Paul, yet in the truth of the matter, the thing itself nevertheless was not a gift of those things which from the beginning He did not naturally have (far otherwise does the matter stand); but rather it is to be considered a return and a recourse to that which from the beginning essentially and inseparably belonged to Him. And a little after on those words, with the blessings of father and mother (Gen. 49:25), he comments thus: Clearly and manifestly is indicated alike that generation of the Only-begotten which is from God and the Father, and that which was made through the holy Virgin, according to which He is believed and was seen as man. For existing naturally and truly as the Son of God and the Father, for our sake He endured that generation which was through the Virgin and the womb, and sucked the breasts. For neither, as seems to some, was He man putatively, but He truly appeared the same that we are, who follow the laws of nature, and used nourishment, although He Himself gave life to the world.
Omnibus his decretoriis auctoritatibus addi possunt alia duo loca ex scriptis S. Hippolyti, quae expresse adeo divinitatem Filii Dei Domini Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi, ejusque consubstantialitatem, et coaeternitatem cum Patre demonstrant, ut nihil magis desiderari queat. In tractatu Adversus Noetum haec in Evangelii verba : « Ego et Pater unum sumus, » aperte declarat Patrem et Filium unum idemque esse, quia « unam eamdemque habent virtutem et potentiam; » et in tractatu Contra Judaeos pariter expresse dicit Christum esse verum
To all these decisive authorities can be added two other passages from the writings of Saint Hippolytus, which so expressly demonstrate the divinity of the Son of God, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and His consubstantiality and coeternity with the Father, that nothing more can be desired. In the treatise Against Noetus on these words in the Gospel: I and the Father are one (John 10:30), he openly declares that the Father and the Son are one and the same, because they have one and the same power and might; and in the treatise Against the Jews he likewise expressly says that Christ is true
Editors' notes and page, col. 358
Footnotes
(4) ‹anchor: unum sumus› · call in col 358
Joan. X, 30.
John 10:30.
(printed under page 189)
(59) ‹anchor: et potentiam› · call in col 358
« Si autem dicat Noetus : Ipse dixit : Ego et Pater unum sumus; advertat animum et intelligat, quod non dixit : Ego et Pater unum sum; sed unum sumus. Illud enim (sumus) non dicitur de uno; sed sic dixit, quia duas Personas demonstravit, unam autem potentiam, sive virtutem. Una enim mens Patris est Puer (Filius)... Unde ad Philippum : Philippe, qui vidit me, vidit Patrem (Joan. XIV, 9); id est, si me vidisti, per me potes Patrem cognoscere. Per imaginem enim, quæ similis est, potest facile Pater cognosci. » S. Hippolyt., Contra Noet., c. 7.
"But if Noetus says, 'He himself said: I and the Father are one,' let him attend and understand that he did not say, 'I and the Father am one,' but 'are one.' For that word (are) is not said of one; he spoke so because he showed two Persons, but one power, or might. For the Child (the Son) is the one mind of the Father... Hence to Philip: Philip, he who has seen me has seen the Father (John 14:9); that is, if you have seen me, through me you can know the Father. For through the image, which is like him, the Father can easily be known." St Hippolytus, Against Noetus, ch. 7.
(printed under page 189)
Page
- running head: ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI.
- marginal letters: A aliqua Romae descripta; B ex rei veritate;; C vere apparuit, quod; D (in footnote)
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: aliqua Romae descripta
Deum, eumque Patri coaeternum nominat. Et in Commentario jam laudato in Genesin eadem fere de coaeternitate Filii habet. « Itaque qui ut homo, inquit S. Hippolytus, periculum subierat, a Patre salvatus esse affirmatur, quanquam natura sua exsistens Deus, κατὰ φύσιν ὑπάρχων Θεός, et universam ipsam visibilem creaturam in bono statu conservans... semper enim fuit in gloria divina, qui ante omne aevum, et tempus, et ante mundi jacta fundamenta proprio Patri coexsistit, τῷ ἰδίῳ συνυπάρχων γεννήτορι. Sane Ariani, qui adhuc supersunt, harum auctoritatum vim eludere quo pacto valeant, non video. Quis enim non agnoscet uti verum Deum, uti Patri consubstantialem, eum, qui ab aeterno fuit in Deo Patre; quem Pater emisit, ut « lumen ex lumine, » ut « radium a sole, » ut « aquam ex fonte; » eum, qui eamdem habet cum Patre virtutem ac potentiam; qui est idem Deus cum universi conditore; qui in sua Persona potentiam Patris ostendit; qui est Deus et Dominus omnium; qui est vera Patris imago; in quo et per quem Pater seipsum manifestat; eum tandem, qui est infinitus, incomprehensibilis, omnipotens, subsistens et operans per seipsum, et est perfectus Deus, sicuti est perfectus homo? Si Ariana impietas contra haec firma adhuc et sibi constans perseverat, nullo alio pacto poterit unquam everti.
God, and names Him coeternal with the Father. And in the Commentary on Genesis already praised he has almost the same things concerning the coeternity of the Son. "Therefore He Who as man," says St Hippolytus, "had undergone peril, is affirmed to have been saved by the Father, although existing by His nature as God, existing by nature as God, and preserving the whole visible creation itself in a good state... for He was always in divine glory, Who before every age, and time, and before the foundations of the world were laid coexists with His own Father, coexisting with His own Begetter." Truly how the Arians who still survive can elude the force of these authorities, I do not see. For who will not acknowledge as true God, as consubstantial with the Father, Him Who from eternity was in God the Father; Whom the Father sent forth as "light from light," as "a ray from the sun," as "water from a fountain;" Him Who has the same virtue and power with the Father; Who is the same God with the Creator of the universe; Who in His own Person shows the power of the Father; Who is God and Lord of all; Who is the true image of the Father; in Whom and through Whom the Father manifests Himself; Him finally, Who is infinite, incomprehensible, omnipotent, subsisting and operating through Himself, and is perfect God, just as He is perfect man? If Arian impiety still perseveres firm and consistent with itself against these things, by no other means will it ever be able to be overthrown.
Unus tamen locus adhuc superest, eximius plane, quem praeterire religio est. Sic autem se habet: « Qualem igitur Filium suum Deus per carnem misit, nisi Verbum, quod a principio scilicet Filium vocavit, quia futurum erat, ut ortum caperet? Et cum Filius vocatur, commune nomen amoris erga homines sumit. Nec enim Verbum per se et sine carne, perfectus Filius erat, cum tamen esset Verbum, Unigenitus. Neque caro per se sine Verbo subsistere poterat, quia in Verbo subsistebat. Sic ergo unus Filius Dei perfectus manifestatus est. » Hunc autem locum quo maxime abutuntur Unitarii, atque plurimum se efferunt, egregie illustrat, ac strenue propugnat doctissimus Maranus his verbis: « Videtur, inquit, sanctus martyr ita locutus fuisse duplici potissimum de causa:
Yet one passage still remains, altogether remarkable, which it is a matter of scruple to pass over. Now it runs thus: "What sort of Son of His own, therefore, did God send through the flesh, save the Word, Whom from the beginning indeed He called Son, because it was to be that He should take His origin? And when He is called Son, He takes a common name of love towards men. For neither was the Word by Himself and without flesh perfect Son, although He was the Word, the Only-begotten. Nor could the flesh by itself subsist without the Word, because it subsisted in the Word. Thus therefore one perfect Son of God was manifested." Now this passage, which the Unitarians especially abuse and over which they greatly exalt themselves, the most learned Maranus excellently illustrates and strenuously defends in these words: "The holy martyr," he says, "seems to have spoken thus for a twofold reason chiefly:
« I. Quia Verbum, etsi perfectus Dei Filius erat ante incarnationem, ut patet ex ipso loco, ubi eum Unigenitum appellat Hippolytus, et ex multis aliis, in quibus de ejus generatione diserte disputat; nondum tamen erat Filius hominis. Hanc ipse interpretationem
"I. Because the Word, although He was the perfect Son of God before the incarnation, as is plain from the passage itself where Hippolytus calls Him the Only-begotten, and from many others in which he expressly disputes concerning His generation, nevertheless was not yet the Son of man. This interpretation
Editors' notes and page, col. 359
Footnotes
(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Dan. VII, 13.
Daniel 7:13.
(printed under page 190)
(60) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Hæc omnia Christus œconomice tanquam homo precabatur, qui erat verus Deus, Θεὸς ὢν ἀληθινός. S. Hippol., Adv. Judæos, num. 4.
All this Christ prayed by way of the economy, as man, he who was true God, "being true God." St Hippolytus, Against the Jews, no. 4.
(printed under page 190)
(61) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Sed quare, o propheta, edissere nobis, cur templum devastatum est? An propter illam olim vituli fabricationem? an propter populi idololatriam? an propter sanguinem prophetarum? an propter adulteria et fornicationes Israel? Minime, inquit; in omnibus enim illis semper veniam et indulgentiam ferebant; sed quia Filium auctoris beneficiorum interfecerunt, ipse enim est coæternus Patri. Αὐτὸς γάρ ἐστιν ὁ τῷ Πατρὶ συναΐδιος. S. Hippolyt. Demonstr. advers. Judæos, num. 7.
But why, O prophet, tell us, was the temple laid waste? Was it for the making of the calf long ago? for the people's idolatry? for the blood of the prophets? for the adulteries and fornications of Israel? Not at all, he says; for in all these they always obtained pardon and indulgence; but because they killed the Son of the author of their benefits, for he is coeternal with the Father. "For he is the one coeternal with the Father." St Hippolytus, Demonstration against the Jews, no. 7.
(printed under page 190)
(62) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
S. Hippolyt. Comment. in Genes., tom. II, pag. 27, 28 et 29.
St Hippolytus, Commentary on Genesis, vol. II, pp. 27, 28 and 29.
(printed under page 190)
(63) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, Contra Noet., num. 11.
The same, Against Noetus, no. 11.
(printed under page 190)
(64) ‹anchor: manifestatus est› · call in col 359
Idem, Contra Noet., c. 15.
The same, Against Noetus, ch. 15.
(printed under page 190)
(65) ‹anchor: de causa› · call in col 359
Maran. Divinit. J. C. lib. IV, c. 13, § 4, p. 459.
Maran, On the Divinity of Jesus Christ, book IV, ch. 13, § 4, p. 459.
(printed under page 190)
Page
- running head: 359 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A Deum, eumque; B emisit, ut; C misit, nisi Verbum,; D ante incarnationem, ut
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek phrases); editors' matter: Deum, eumque Patri (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: inter-[pretationem]
suppeditat. Observat enim Verbum ante incarnationem vocatum fuisse Filium hominis; unde colligit perfectum Filium non fuisse, cum nondum esset homo. His enim verbis: « A principio Filium vocavit, commune nomen amoris erga homines sumit, » Filius hominis clare designatur. Idque confirmari potest ex cap. 4 ubi sic loquitur Hippolytus: « Verbum enim caro erat, Spiritus erat, Virtus erat. Unus commune nomen et in usu apud homines sibi sumpsit, vocatus a principio Filius hominis propter futurum, quamvis nondum esset homo, sicut Daniel testatur, inquiens: Vidi, et ecce cum nubibus coeli quasi filius hominis veniebat. » Cum Noetus metaphoras in Filii voce venaretur, et Patrem et Filium unam et eamdem Personam esse statueret; suscepta adversus hunc haereticum disputatio postulabat, ut Verbum Hippolytus ante incarnationem non metaphorice, sed vere ob futuram ex Virgine generationem Filium hominis vocatum fuisse praetenderet, nec tamen perfecte Filium fuisse, quia nondum ex Virgine genitus erat.
he himself supplies. For he observes that the Word before the incarnation was called the Son of man; whence he gathers that He was not perfect Son, since He was not yet man. For by these words: 'From the beginning He called Him Son, He takes a common name of love towards men,' the Son of man is clearly designated. And this can be confirmed from chapter 4, where Hippolytus speaks thus: 'For the Word was flesh, was Spirit, was Power. One took to Himself a common name and one in use among men, called from the beginning the Son of man on account of the future, although He was not yet man, just as Daniel testifies, saying: I saw, and behold with the clouds of heaven One like the son of man was coming (Dan. 7:13).' Since Noetus hunted after metaphors in the word Son, and maintained that the Father and the Son were one and the same Person, the disputation undertaken against this heretic demanded that Hippolytus should maintain that the Word before the incarnation was called the Son of man not metaphorically, but truly on account of His future generation from the Virgin, and yet was not perfectly Son, because He was not yet begotten from the Virgin.
« II. Non solum Verbum in Christo, sed etiam corpus et animam considerat Hippolytus; ac Verbum unitum carni, unum et perfectum Dei Filium existimat: ita ut Christus non solum quatenus Verbum, sed etiam quatenus Deus et homo, Filius sit Dei. Quemadmodum igitur caro sine Verbo Filius Dei esse non potest; ita Verbum sine carne, perfectum quidem Verbum erat et Unigenitus, sed unus ille perfectus Filius, ex Verbo, corpore et animo constans, non erat. Huc pertinet, quod ait cap. 4: « Est igitur caro, quae a Verbo Patris oblata, ut munus est; caro, inquam, quae est ex Spiritu sancto, et Virgine, perfectus Filius Dei ostensus. » In eamdem sententiam accipienda, quae leguntur in libro genuino De Antichristo, cap. 3: Αὐτὸς πάλιν ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ παῖς, ὁ πάλαι μὲν Λόγος. « Ipse rursus Dei Filius, qui prius Verbum erat. » Hactenus V. C. Neque minus solide tuetur eumdem locum Gregorius Bullus contra Zwicharum Irenici Irenicorum auctorem in haec verba disserens:
"II. Hippolytus considers not only the Word in Christ, but also the body and the soul; and he judges the Word united to the flesh to be one and the perfect Son of God: so that Christ not only inasmuch as He is the Word, but also inasmuch as He is God and man, is the Son of God. Just as, therefore, the flesh without the Word cannot be the Son of God; so the Word without the flesh was indeed the perfect Word and the Only-begotten, yet was not that one perfect Son, consisting of the Word, a body, and a soul. To this pertains what he says in chapter 4: 'The flesh therefore which was offered by the Word of the Father as a gift—the flesh, I say, which is from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin—was shown to be the perfect Son of God.' In the same sense are to be taken the things which are read in the genuine book On the Antichrist, chapter 3: He again is the Child of God, Who of old indeed was the Word. 'He again is the Son of God, Who previously was the Word.' Thus far the illustrious man. Nor does George Bull defend the same passage any less solidly against Zwicker, the author of the Irenicum Irenicorum, discoursing in these words:
« Non ita insaniit Hippolytus, ut diceret (quod dixisse illum anonymus voluit) Verbo sive Unigenito quidquam intrinsecae perfectionis revera accessisse ex carnis assumptione; imo contrarium aperte docuit. Nam primo diserte ait, Dominum nostrum perfectum fuisse Verbum et Unigenitum ante incarnationem. Deinde clare docet, Verbum
"'Hippolytus was not so mad as to say (what the anonymous writer would have it that he said) that anything of intrinsic perfection really accrued to the Word or Only-begotten from the assumption of the flesh; nay rather, he openly taught the contrary. For first he expressly says that our Lord was the perfect Word and Only-begotten before the incarnation. Next he clearly teaches that the Word
Editors' notes and page, col. 360
Footnotes
(a) ‹anchor: hominis veniebat› · call in col 360
Dan. VII, 13.
Dan. 7:13.
(printed under page 190, under col 359)
(66) ‹anchor: verba disserens› · call in col 360
Bullus, Defens. fid. Nicæn., sect. II, cap. 8, § 5, pag. 99.
Bull, Defence of the Nicene Faith, section II, ch. 8, § 5, p. 99.
(printed under page 190)
Page
- running head: ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 360
- marginal letters: A pretationem suppeditat.; B statueret; suscepta; C animo constans, non; D aperte docuit. Nam
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek clause Αὐτὸς πάλιν ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ παῖς, ὁ πάλαι μὲν Λόγος.); editors' matter: pretationem suppeditat. (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [inter]pretationem
sive Unigenitum adeo ex carne humana non melioratum esse, ut caro illa ipsam suam substantiam Verbo debeat. Quid ergo, inquies, voluit Hippolytus, cum ait Verbum et Unigenitum sine carne perfectum non fuisse Filium? Voluit, inquam, manifeste, τὸν Λόγον ante incarnationem non omni filiationis genere, ut ita dicam, defunctum fuisse, sive nondum fuisse omni modo, quo Pater voluit, Dei Filium. Scilicet Domino nostro triplicem nativitatem et filiationem attribuerunt veteres. Prima est, qua ut Λόγος ex mente Patris ab aeterno natus fuit. Ex hac nativitate perfecta hypostasis divina exstitit; nec ipsi quidquam postea accessit, sed potius caeterae nativitates συγκαταβάσεις fuerunt, sive condescensiones Filii Dei. Altera nempe nativitas est, qua ὁ Λόγος a Deo Patre, apud quem, cum nihil adhuc praeter Deum exsisteret, adeoque ex aeterno fuerat, κατ' ἐνέργειαν exivit, ac tanquam ex utero ejus prodiit, seque demisit ad condendum universa. Tertia demum nativitas tum fuit, cum idem ὁ Λόγος caro factus est, et e sinu Patris in uterum beatissimae Virginis illapsus, homo ex ipsa natus est per inumbrationem Spiritus sancti. Hoc fuit τοῦ Λόγου extrema συγκατάβασις (a nobis hominibus, adeoque ab ipsis angelis aeternum adoranda), qua peracta, perfectus Filius Dei factus est, hoc est, ut dixi, omni filiationis genere defunctus est: siquidem caeterae filiationes, quae humanam Christi naturam spectant, ex hac dependent, atque ex ipsa consequuntur. Haec fusius explicabimus, inquit cl. Bullus, ad sectionem illam 3, de Filii τῷ συναϊδίῳ. »
or Only-begotten was so far from being made better by human flesh, that that flesh owes its very substance to the Word. What then, you will say, did Hippolytus mean when he says that the Word and Only-begotten without flesh was not perfect Son? He meant, I say, manifestly, that the Word before the incarnation had not fulfilled, so to speak, every kind of sonship, or was not yet in every way that the Father willed the Son of God. Namely, the ancients attributed to our Lord a threefold nativity and sonship. The first is that by which as the Word He was born from the mind of the Father from eternity. From this nativity a perfect divine hypostasis existed; nor did anything afterwards accrue to Him, but rather the other nativities were condescensions, or stoopings down of the Son of God. That is to say, the second nativity is that by which the Word went forth according to operation from God the Father—with Whom, when nothing as yet existed beside God, and therefore from eternity, He had been—and came forth as if from His womb, and lowered Himself to create the universe. Finally, the third nativity was then, when the same Word was made flesh, and having glided down from the bosom of the Father into the womb of the most blessed Virgin, was born as man from her through the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit. This was the utmost condescension of the Word (to be adored eternally by us men, and indeed by the angels themselves), upon the completion of which He became the perfect Son of God, that is, as I have said, He fulfilled every kind of sonship: since the other sonships, which regard the human nature of Christ, depend upon this one and follow from it. These things we shall explain more at length,' says the illustrious Bull, 'at that third section, on the coeternity of the Son.'"
Interim illud observandum est, inter ea, quae Irenici auctor ex libro Hippolyti Contra Noetum adduxit, tanquam catholicae, id est, Nicaenae fidei contraria, quaedam esse, quae illam ipsam fidem egregie confirmant. Hujusmodi est illud: « Cum alium dico (nempe Filium a Patre), non duos Deos dico, sed tanquam lumen ex lumine, et aquam ex fonte, aut radium a sole: una enim virtus ex toto; totum vero Pater, ex quo virtus, Verbum: hoc vero mens seu sensus, qui prodiens in mundum, ostensus est Puer Dei. Omnia igitur per eum facta sunt; ipse solus ex Patre genitus. » Ubi Patrem et Filium, persona distinctos, unum tamen esse Deum inde probat, quod Filius non sit Deus a seipso, sed Deus de Deo, atque ex
Meanwhile this must be observed, that among those things which the author of the Irenicum adduced from the book of Hippolytus Against Noetus as contrary to the catholic, that is, the Nicene faith, there are some which excellently confirm that very faith. Of this sort is that saying: "When I say another (namely, the Son as distinct from the Father), I do not say two Gods, but as light from light, and water from a fountain, or a ray from the sun: for there is one power from the whole; and the whole is the Father, from Whom is the power, the Word: and this is the mind or sense, which coming forth into the world, was shown to be the Child of God. All things therefore were made through Him; He alone was begotten from the Father." Where He proves that the Father and the Son, though distinct in person, are nevertheless one God from the fact that the Son is not God from Himself, but God from God, and from
Editors' notes and page, col. 361
Footnotes
(67) ‹anchor: est illud› · call in col 361
Contr. Noet., num. 11.
Against Noetus, no. 11.
(printed under page 191)
(68) ‹anchor: a Patre› · call in col 361
Justino martyri, quando Filius ἕτερόν τι a Patre esse dicitur, et Tertulliano, quando Filium et Patrem esse aliud ab alio affirmat, eadem, quæ Hippolyto mens, ut Personarum distinctionem ostendant, non ut ὁμοούσιον inficientur.
Justin Martyr, when the Son is said to be "something other" than the Father, and Tertullian, when he affirms that the Son and the Father are other and other, have the same mind as Hippolytus: to show the distinction of the Persons, not to deny the homoousion.
(printed under page 191)
(69) ‹anchor: Puer Dei› · call in col 361
Observat cl. Grabius S. Hippolyto solemne fuisse, Christum vocare τὸν Παῖδα τοῦ Θεοῦ, Puerum, sive potius Filium Dei; quod patet ex ejus demonstratione De Christo et Antichristo, num. 3, Αὐτὸς πάλιν ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ Παῖς, ὁ πάλαι μὲν Λόγος. Quæ verba sollicitius perpendens cl. Maranus in egregio opere, cui titulus : Divinitas D. N. J. C., lib. IV, cap. 13, pag. 460, ea sic reddit : « Ipse rursus Dei Filius, qui prius Verbum erat. » Neque aliter hunc locum interpretatur Grabius ad Bulli Defens. fid. Nic., pag. 101. Quid quod eadem loquendi ratione paulo post utitur sanctus martyr? Εἷς γὰρ καὶ ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ Παῖς, quæ sic vertit ipsemet Combefisius : « Unus enim est Dei Filius. » Ita scilicet S. Hippolytus aliique antiqui Patres Christum appellarunt ex Isaiæ XLII, aliisque locis, ubi Deus de ipso ait : Ἰδοὺ ὁ παῖς μου· quanquam παῖς ibi servum significet.
The distinguished Grabe observes that it was customary with St Hippolytus to call Christ "the Child of God," the Child, or rather the Son of God; as is plain from his demonstration On Christ and Antichrist, no. 3, "He again, the Child of God, who of old was the Word." Weighing these words more carefully, the distinguished Maran, in his excellent work entitled The Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, book IV, ch. 13, p. 460, renders them thus: "He again the Son of God, who before was the Word." Grabe interprets the passage no differently on Bull's Defence of the Nicene Faith, p. 101. What of the fact that the holy martyr uses the same manner of speaking a little later? "For the Child of God too is one," which Combefis himself translates thus: "For the Son of God is one." So, namely, St Hippolytus and other ancient Fathers named Christ from Isaiah 42 and other places, where God says of him, "Behold my child," although pais there means servant.
(printed under page 191)
(70) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Contr. Noet., num. 14.
Against Noetus, no. 14.
(printed under page 191)
Page
- running head: 361 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A sive Unigenitum adeo; B vitas est, qua ὁ Λόγος; C cl. Bullus, ad sectionem; D nitus. » Ubi Patrem
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek words); editors' matter: sive Unigenitum adeo (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
Patre, tanquam lumen ex lumine, et aqua ex fonte, et radius a sole prodeat, et Filium diserte eximit ex numero rerum a Deo factarum, illum solum ex ipso Deo Patre genitum pronuntians: quae cum Nicaena fide ac confessione omnino conspirant.
the Father, just as light comes forth from light, and water from a fountain, and a ray from the sun, and he expressly exempts the Son from the number of things made by God, pronouncing Him alone to have been begotten from God the Father Himself: which things agree altogether with the Nicene faith and confession.
Neque cuique offendiculo esse debet, quod ibidem Hippolytus Patrem dicat totum, Filium vero virtutem ex toto. Nam totum recte dicitur Pater, quia est πηγὴ θεότητος. Siquidem divinitas, quae in Filio est et in Spiritu sancto, Patris est, quia a Patre derivatur. Apprime itidem catholica sunt, quae mox ex eodem Hippolyti libro sophista affert, nempe haec: « Pater mandat, Verbum perficit; Filius autem ostenditur, per quem Pater creditur. OEconomia consensionis redigitur ad unum Deum. Unus enim est Deus, qui mandat Pater, qui obedit Filius, qui docet scientiam Spiritus sanctus. Pater, qui est super omnia, Filius per omnia, Spiritus sanctus in omnibus. » Hic scilicet S. Hippolytus Patrem, Filium et Spiritum sanctum unum esse Deum aperte docet, et unicuique Trinitatis Personae omnipraesentiam tribuit, ac vim divinam, quae cuncta pervadat. Quod vero Patrem dicit mandare, Filium obedire, in eo consentientes secum et similiter loquentes habet alios Patres orthodoxos, non modo Antenicaenos, sed et qui post concilium Nicaenum floruerunt... Quod itidem Patrem proprie super omnia esse dicit, id ad ἐξοχὴν illam Patris, qua Pater est, omnino referendum, quam Catholici omnes agnoscunt.
Nor ought it to be a stumbling-block to anyone that in the same place Hippolytus calls the Father the whole, and the Son the power from the whole. For the Father is rightly called the whole, because He is the fountain of deity. Since the divinity which is in the Son and in the Holy Spirit is the Father's, because it is derived from the Father. Especially catholic likewise are the things which presently from the same book of Hippolytus the sophist brings forward, namely these: "The Father commands, the Word performs; and the Son is shown, through Whom the Father is believed. The economy of harmony is reduced to one God. For there is one God: the Father Who commands, the Son Who obeys, the Holy Spirit Who teaches knowledge. The Father Who is over all things, the Son through all things, the Holy Spirit in all things." Here namely St Hippolytus openly teaches that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one God, and attributes omnipresence to each Person of the Trinity, and a divine power which pervades all things. And as to his saying that the Father commands and the Son obeys, in this he has agreeing with him and speaking similarly other orthodox Fathers, not only Ante-Nicene, but also those who flourished after the Council of Nicaea... And as to his saying likewise that the Father is properly over all things, that must be referred altogether to that pre-eminence of the Father whereby He is Father, which all Catholics acknowledge.
ARTICULUS V.
ARTICLE V.
DE DIVINITATE SPIRITUS SANCTI, EJUSQUE PROPRIETATIBUS PERSONALIBUS.
ON THE DIVINITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, AND HIS PERSONAL PROPERTIES.
Quoad Spiritum sanctum, omni possibili praecisione declarat idem sanctus episcopus et martyr, divinum hunc Spiritum esse tertiam Personam sanctissimae Trinitatis, ut supra jam vidimus. Supponit vero idem auctor tres divinas Personas esse unum eumdemque Deum; ait quippe tres has Personas habere unam eamdemque potentiam, unam eamdemque virtutem: ergo supponit Spiritum sanctum esse Deum et esse Patri Filioque consubstantialem. Caeterum perspicue mentem suam prodit super hoc articulo cum ait, « hanc consensionem » trium divinarum Personarum « redigi ad unum Deum: OEconomia consensionis redigitur ad unum Deum. Unus enim est Deus, subjungit,
As regards the Holy Spirit, with all possible precision the same holy bishop and martyr declares that this divine Spirit is the third Person of the most holy Trinity, as we have already seen above. Moreover, the same author supposes that the three divine Persons are one and the same God; for he says that these three Persons have one and the same power, one and the same virtue: therefore he supposes that the Holy Spirit is God and is consubstantial with the Father and the Son. For the rest, he clearly discloses his mind upon this article when he says that "this harmony" of the three divine Persons "is reduced to one God: The economy of harmony is reduced to one God. For there is one God, he subjoins:
Editors' notes and page, col. 362
Footnotes
(71) ‹anchor: unum Deum› · call in col 362
Idem, loc. cit.
The same, in the place cited.
(printed under page 191)
Page
- running head: ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 362
- marginal letters: A Patre, tanquam lumen; B enim est Deus, qui; C agnoscunt.; D nem » trium divinarum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek phrases πηγὴ θεότητος and ἐξοχὴν); editors' matter: Patre, tanquam lumen, ARTICULUS V. (Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: subjun-[git]
qui mandat, Pater; qui obedit, Filius; qui docet scientiam, Spiritus sanctus. » Aliter Deum unum intelligere non possumus, « nisi vere Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui sancto credamus: per hanc enim Trinitatem Pater glorificatur. » Ait insuper S. Hippolytus, nos adorare Spiritum sanctum: « Spiritum sanctum adoramus. » Illi tribuit eamdem gloriam, eamdemque potentiam ac Filio, cujus Spiritus est: « Ipsi (Christo) gloria et potentia cum sacrosancto bono et vivifico ejus Spiritu. » Igitur certum ratumque est, juxta S. Hippolyti doctrinam, Spiritum sanctum esse Deum, sicuti et Pater Deus est, et Filius Deus est, illisque vere esse consubstantialem.
the Father, Who commands; the Son, Who obeys; the Holy Spirit, Who teaches knowledge." Otherwise we cannot understand one God, "unless we truly believe in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit: for through this Trinity the Father is glorified." St Hippolytus says besides that we adore the Holy Spirit: "We adore the Holy Spirit." To Him he attributes the same glory and the same power as to the Son, Whose Spirit He is: "To Him (Christ) be glory and power with His all-holy, good, and life-giving Spirit." Therefore it is certain and established, according to the doctrine of St Hippolytus, that the Holy Spirit is God, just as both the Father is God and the Son is God, and is truly consubstantial with Them.
Proprietates personales Spiritus sancti. — Proprietates personales Spiritus sancti modo enumerat S. Hippolytus: « Hic est Spiritus qui ab initio ferebatur super aquas, per quem movetur mundus, natura creata consistit, omnia vitam accipiunt: qui in prophetis operatus est, in Christum devolavit. Hic est Spiritus specie linguarum ignearum datus apostolis; de hoc Gabriel ad Virginem: Spiritus sanctus superveniet in te, etc. Per hunc Spiritum Petrus beatam illam vocem effatus est: Tu es Christus Filius Dei viventis; per hunc Spiritum firmata Ecclesiae petra est. Tandem per hunc Spiritum, conjunctum cum aqua (baptismi), regeneratus homo vivificatur, ex servitute in libertatem transit, ex tyrannide ad regnum, ex corruptione ad incorruptibilitatem. » Haec sunt notabiliora, quae in divo Hippolyto occurrunt quoad tres divinas Personas.
Personal properties of the Holy Spirit. — The personal properties of the Holy Spirit St Hippolytus next enumerates: "This is the Spirit Who from the beginning was borne above the waters (Gen. 1:2), through Whom the world is moved, created nature holds together, all things receive life; Who worked in the prophets, and flew down upon Christ. This is the Spirit given to the apostles in the form of fiery tongues; of Him Gabriel said to the Virgin: The Holy Spirit shall come upon you (Luke 1:35), etc. Through this Spirit Peter uttered that blessed voice: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matt. 16:16); through this Spirit the rock of the Church was made firm. Finally through this Spirit, conjoined with the water (of baptism), regenerated man is made alive, passes from servitude into liberty, from tyranny to a kingdom, from corruption to incorruptibility." These are the more notable things which occur in St Hippolytus as regards the three divine Persons.
ARTICULUS VI.
ARTICLE VI.
DE MYSTERIO INCARNATIONIS, ET DUARUM NATURARUM DISTINCTIONE IN CHRISTO.
ON THE MYSTERY OF THE INCARNATION, AND THE DISTINCTION OF THE TWO NATURES IN CHRIST.
Solus Filius incarnatus. — Non minus dilucide exponit sanctus Portuensis episcopus noster sanctissimum incarnationis mysterium, duasque in Domino nostro Jesu Christo omnino distinctas naturas, divinam nimirum et humanam, profitetur. Atque primo docet S. Hippolytus nec Patrem, nec
Only the Son incarnate. — No less clearly does our holy bishop of Portus set forth the most holy mystery of the incarnation, and professes two altogether distinct natures in our Lord Jesus Christ, namely the divine and the human. And first St Hippolytus teaches that neither the Father nor
Editors' notes and page, col. 363
Footnotes
(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Gen. I, 2.
Genesis 1:2.
(printed under page 192)
(7) ‹anchor: superveniet in te› · call in col 363
Luc. I, 35.
Luke 1:35.
(printed under page 192)
(8) ‹anchor: Filius Dei viventis› · call in col 363
Matth. XVI, 16; Marc. VIII, 29; Luc. IX, 20; Joan. VI, 70.
Matthew 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20; John 6:70.
(printed under page 192)
(72) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
S. Hippolyt. Adv. Noet., cap. 12.
St Hippolytus, Against Noetus, ch. 12.
(printed under page 192)
(73) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, Orat. in Theophan., num. 10.
The same, Oration on the Theophany, no. 10.
(printed under page 192)
(74) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, ibid., num. 9.
The same, in the same place, no. 9.
(printed under page 192)
(75) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, Adv. Noet., num. 13.
The same, Against Noetus, no. 13.
(printed under page 192)
(76) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
« Dic mihi, o beata Maria, quid erat a te in utero conceptum, et quid a te in matrice virginali gestabatur? Verbum erat Dei, primogenitus, qui e cœlis in te descenderat, et homo primogenitus in utero formatus, ut primogenitum Verbum Dei primogenito homini unitum ostenderetur. » Idem apud Theodoret. Dialog. 1, et tom. I Opp., p. 267.
"Tell me, O blessed Mary, what was it that was conceived by you in the womb, and what was it that you carried in your virgin womb? It was the Word of God, the firstborn, who had come down from heaven into you, and a firstborn man formed in the womb, so that the firstborn Word of God might be shown united to a firstborn man." The same, in Theodoret, Dialogue 1, and Works vol. I, p. 267.
(printed under page 192)
(77) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
« Credamus igitur, fratres, secundum traditionem apostolorum, quod Deus Verbum a cœlis descendit in sanctam Virginem Mariam, ut ex ea incarnatus, sumpta anima humana, rationis inquam participe, factus omnia quæcunque homo est, excepto peccato, salvaret Adam, qui ceciderat, et immortalitatem hominibus largiretur iis qui crederent in nomine suo. In omnibus igitur demonstratum est nobis Verbum veritatis, quod unus est Pater, cujus adest Verbum, per quod omnia fecit; quod posterioribus temporibus, sicut superius diximus, misit Pater ad salutem hominum. Hoc per legem et prophetas prædicatum est venturum esse in mundum. Sicut ergo prædicatum est, sic præsens seipsum manifestum fecit ex Virgine et Spiritu sancto novus homo factus : habens cœleste, quod paternum erat, tanquam Verbum; terrenum vero, tanquam ex vetere Adam, per Virginem incarnatus. Sic in mundum egressus, Deus corporatus, Θεὸς ἐν σώματι, apparuit, egressus perfectus homo, ἄνθρωπος τέλειος. Non enim per fictionem aut mutationem, sed vere factus homo : Οὐ γὰρ κατὰ φαντασίαν ἢ τροπήν, ἀληθῶς γενόμενος ἄνθρωπος. » S. Hippolyt. Contr. Noet., num. 17.
"Let us believe, then, brethren, according to the tradition of the apostles, that God the Word came down from heaven into the holy Virgin Mary, so that, incarnate of her, taking a human soul, a rational one I mean, and become everything that man is except sin, he might save Adam, who had fallen, and bestow immortality on men, on those who believe in his name. In all things, then, the Word of truth has shown us that the Father is one, whose Word is present, through whom he made all things; whom in later times, as we said above, the Father sent for the salvation of men. This was proclaimed by the law and the prophets as about to come into the world. As, then, it was proclaimed, so being present he made himself manifest, made a new man of the Virgin and the Holy Spirit: having the heavenly, which was the Father's, as the Word; and the earthly, as from the old Adam, incarnate through the Virgin. So going forth into the world, God embodied, 'God in a body,' appeared; going forth a perfect man, 'a perfect man.' For not by appearance or change, but truly was he made man: 'For not in appearance or by change, but truly having become man.'" St Hippolytus, Against Noetus, no. 17.
(printed under page 192)
(78) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Contr. Noet., num. 15.
Against Noetus, no. 15.
(printed under page 192)
Page
- running head: 363 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A git, qui mandat, Pater;; B prietates personales Spiritus; C ad incorruptibilitatem. » Haec; D (73) Idem, Orat.
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: git, qui mandat, ARTICULUS VI. (Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [subjun]git
Spiritum sanctum humanam carnem assumpsisse, sed Verbum Dei: « Missus autem, inquit, non est alius, quam Verbum. » Divinum hoc Verbum descendit in sanctam Virginem Mariam, et ex ea est incarnatum, sumpta anima humana, « factus omnia quaecunque homo est, excepto peccato. » Hoc Verbum Dei appellatum est Dei Filius ab initio, quia in tempore inter homines nasci debebat: « Nec enim Verbum per se et sine carne Filius perfectus erat, cum tamen esset perfectum Verbum Unigenitus. » Hoc est, non est adeptus perfectam qualitatem Filii, nisi per unionem duarum naturarum, per quam et Filius Dei, et Filius hominis simul effectus est.
the Holy Spirit assumed human flesh, but the Word of God: "Now He Who was sent," he says, "is no other than the Word." This divine Word descended into the holy Virgin Mary, and from her was incarnate, having taken a human soul, "having become all things whatsoever man is, sin excepted." This Word of God was called the Son of God from the beginning, because in time He was to be born among men: "For neither was the Word by Himself and without flesh perfect Son, although He was the perfect Word, the Only-begotten." That is, He did not obtain the perfect quality of Son save through the union of the two natures, through which He was made both Son of God and Son of man at once.
Unio duarum naturarum Christi in una sola persona. — Divinum Verbum, Dei primogenitum, unitum cum Virginis primogenito, est verus Deus et verus homo, perfectus Deus et perfectus homo. « Totus Deus ipse, totus homo idem ipse, totus Deus pariter natura, et homo idem ipse. Deitate quidem, divina per suam ipsius sanctissimam carnem, non exsistentia natura carnis, operans; humanitate vero, humana, non exsistentia natura deitatis, deitatis indulgentia patiens. Nil divinum nudum corpore operatur, nil humanum idem ipse privatum divinitate gerens; servans sibimet modum secundum utrumque immutabilem, per quem operatus est utraque decenti more, ad approbationem perfectae ac verae nihilque habentis pravitatis inhumanationis suae. »
Union of the two natures of Christ in one single person. — The divine Word, the firstborn of God, united with the firstborn of the Virgin, is true God and true man, perfect God and perfect man. "Wholly God Himself, wholly man the very same, wholly God likewise by nature, and man the very same. By His deity indeed, working divine things through His own most holy flesh, things not existing by the nature of the flesh; and by His humanity, suffering human things, things not existing by the nature of deity, by the indulgence of His deity. He works nothing divine stripped of the body, the very same carrying on nothing human deprived of divinity; preserving for Himself a mode immutable according to each, through which He worked both in a fitting manner, for the proof of His perfect and true inhumanation, having nothing of deceit."
Quod quidem factum est absque ulla mutatione hujus vel illius naturae: « Habens coeleste, quod paternum erat, tanquam Verbum; terrenum vero, tanquam ex vetere Adam, per Virginem incarnatus. Sic... Deus corporatus apparuit. Salvator ex ea (Maria) natus est sine confusione Deus et homo, ἀσυγχύτως Θεὸς καὶ ἄνθρωπος. » Hae postremae loquendi formulae excerptae sunt ex quodam fragmento Commentarii, quod exaravit S. Hippolytus in Proverbia; ibi enim explicans haec capitis IX verba: Sapientia aedificavit domum ....., miscuit
Which indeed was done without any change of this or that nature: "Having the heavenly, which was paternal, as the Word; and the earthly, as from the old Adam, incarnate through the Virgin. Thus... God appeared embodied. The Saviour was born from her (Mary) without confusion God and man, unconfusedly God and man." These last formulas of speaking are excerpted from a certain fragment of the Commentary which St Hippolytus wrote on Proverbs; for there, explaining these words of chapter 9: Wisdom has built a house ....., has mingled
Editors' notes and page, col. 364
Footnotes
(79) ‹anchor: inhumanationis suæ› · call in col 364
Idem, lib. De theologia et incarnatione contra Beronem et Helicem, num. 7.
The same, the book On Theology and the Incarnation, against Beron and Helix, no. 7.
(printed under page 192)
(80) ‹anchor: corporatus apparuit› · call in col 364
Idem, Contra Noet., num. 17.
The same, Against Noetus, no. 17.
(printed under page 192)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 364
- marginal letters: A Spiritum sanctum humanam; B sona. — Divinum Verbum,; C suae (79). »; D rioribus temporibus, sicut
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek phrase ἀσυγχύτως Θεὸς καὶ ἄνθρωπος); editors' matter: Spiritum sanctum humanam (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
vinum, » eadem interpretatur de duabus Jesu Christi naturis, per vinum intelligens naturam divinam; per aquam vero naturam humanam. Miscuit in poculo suo vinum (inquit ille), in Virgine divinitatem suam uniens cum carne, tanquam vinum merum ac purissimum; sive, ut alibi etiam habet: Mortale corpus nostrum suae admiscendo virtuti.
her wine (Prov. 9:1–2)," he interprets the same of the two natures of Jesus Christ, understanding by the wine the divine nature, and by the water the human nature. She has mingled her wine in her cup (says he), uniting in the Virgin His divinity with the flesh, like pure and unmixed wine; or, as he also has elsewhere: By mingling our mortal body with His own power.
Proprietates et operationes distinctae duarum naturarum in Jesu Christo. — Caeterum inanis scrupulus esset opinari, Eutychianam haeresim designari hac voce μίξας, admiscens; praeter enim superius recitata apertissima testimonia, innumera pariter hoc loco afferre possumus, quae ab omni erroris suspicione super hoc articulo illum reddunt immunem. Etenim in tractatu Contra Noetum, peculiares proprietates operationesque tribuit duabus Christi naturis et quidem his verbis: « Sic igitur humana sua non recusat, qui demonstrabatur esse Deus, cum... super pulvinum dormit, qui naturam habet insomnem, ut Deus.... cum ab Herode spernitur, qui totam terram judicaturus est... et a militibus illuditur is, cui astant millia millium, et decies centena millia angelorum. » In tractatu Contra Beronem expresse docet, incarnationis mysterium demonstrare duas substantias perfectas, divinam et humanam: « Mysterium namque divinae incarnationis... perfectae deitatis et plenae demonstrativum humanitatis; » et utramque naturam suas proprietates et operationes naturales absque ulla mutatione servasse: « secundum utrumque suum semper permanens sine casu, quibus divine pariter et humane operatus est: perfectionem per omnem utriusque rationem sibi naturaliter incommutabilem servans; » atque ideo divinum Verbum miracula patrabat, caro vero patiebatur: « Deitate quidem divina... operans; humanitate vero humana. »
Distinct properties and operations of the two natures in Jesus Christ. — For the rest, it would be an idle scruple to suppose that the Eutychian heresy is designated by this word μίξας, mingling; for besides the most open testimonies recited above, we can likewise bring forward innumerable others in this place, which render him immune from all suspicion of error upon this article. For in the treatise Against Noetus, he attributes peculiar properties and operations to the two natures of Christ, and indeed in these words: "Thus therefore He does not refuse His human things, Who was demonstrated to be God, when... He sleeps upon a pillow, Who has a sleepless nature as God.... when He is despised by Herod, Who is to judge the whole earth... and He is mocked by the soldiers, by Whom stand thousands of thousands and ten thousand times a hundred thousand angels." In the treatise Against Beron he expressly teaches that the mystery of the incarnation demonstrates two perfect substances, the divine and the human: "For the mystery of the divine incarnation... is demonstrative of perfect deity and full humanity;" and that each nature preserved its own natural properties and operations without any change: "permanently remaining always without lapse according to each of His own, by which He worked divinely and humanly alike: preserving perfection naturally unchangeable for Himself through every principle of each;" and therefore the divine Word wrought miracles, while the flesh suffered: "By His deity indeed working divine things... and by His humanity human things."
In humanitate sua Salvator noster esurivit et sitivit; et in divinitate sua uno eodemque tempore adorabatur ab angelis: « Humanam quidem ipsius naturam facile est agnoscere, quando esurit et sitit... Divina vero ipsius natura non obscure cernitur, quando ab angelis adoratur. » Uno verbo, operationes istae adeo distinctae sunt, juxta S. Hippolytum, quod Verbum, « nihil divinum corpore
In His humanity our Saviour hungered and thirsted; and in His divinity at one and the same time He was adored by the angels: "His human nature indeed it is easy to recognize, when He hungers and thirsts... And His divine nature is not obscurely discerned, when He is adored by the angels." In a word, those operations are so distinct, according to St Hippolytus, that the Word "nothing divine by the body
Editors' notes and page, col. 365
Footnotes
(9-10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images) Prov. IX, 1.
Proverbs 9:1.
(printed under page 193)
(81) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, in illud Proverb. IX, tom. I Opp., pag. 282, et apud Galland., tom. II Biblioth. PP. colum. 488.
The same, on the passage of Proverbs 9, Works vol. I, p. 282, and in Gallandi, Bibliotheca Patrum vol. II, col. 488.
(printed under page 193)
(82) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
« Quod enim Dei Verbum cum esset carnis expers, sanctam carnem ex sancta Virgine induit, tanquam sponsus sibi ipsam in crucis patibulo vestem contexens; quo nimirum mortale corpus nostrum suæ adunando virtuti, et corruptibile incorruptibili, infirmum forti miscens, homini qui perierat, salutem præstaret. » Idem, De Antichr., num. 4.
"For the Word of God, being without flesh, put on the holy flesh from the holy Virgin, as a bridegroom weaving the garment for himself on the gibbet of the cross; so that, uniting our mortal body to his own power, and mingling the corruptible with the incorruptible, the weak with the strong, he might bring salvation to man who had perished." The same, On Antichrist, no. 4.
(printed under page 193)
(83) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, Contra Noet., num. 18.
The same, Against Noetus, no. 18.
(printed under page 193)
(84) ‹anchor: divinam et humanam› · call in col 365
Idem, Adv. Beron. et Helic., tom. I Opp., pag. 227 et 228, et apud Galland., colum. 467 et 468.
The same, Against Beron and Helix, Works vol. I, pp. 227 and 228, and in Gallandi, cols. 467 and 468.
(printed under page 193)
(85) ‹anchor: vero patiebatur› · call in col 365
Idem, ibid., apud Fabric., pag. 226, et Galland. col. 469.
The same, in the same place, in Fabricius, p. 226, and Gallandi, col. 469.
(printed under page 193)
(86) ‹anchor: ab angelis› · call in col 365
Idem, in psal. II, tom. I Opp., pag. 268, et Galland., col. 486. Vide et apud Fabric., pag. 226, et tom. II, pag. 24, 27, 28, 45, et tom. I, pag. 263 et 264.
The same, on Psalm 2, Works vol. I, p. 268, and Gallandi, col. 486. See also in Fabricius, p. 226, and vol. II, pp. 24, 27, 28, 45, and vol. I, pp. 263 and 264.
(printed under page 193)
(87) ‹anchor: S. Hippolytum› · call in col 365
Idem, Contra Beronem, num. 8, apud Galland., col. 469.
The same, Against Beron, no. 8, in Gallandi, col. 469.
(printed under page 193)
(88) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, Comment. in Genesim, tom I Opp., pag. 24, et apud Galland., col. 478.
The same, Commentary on Genesis, Works vol. I, p. 24, and in Gallandi, col. 478.
(printed under page 193)
Page
- running head: 365 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A vinum, » eadem; B Etenim in tractatu Contra; C mutatione servasse: « secundum; D polytum (87), quod Verbum,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek word μίξας); editors' matter: vinum, » eadem (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
operabatur, nihil humanum divinitate gerebat. Verum licet mortuus est tanquam homo, tamen secundum divinitatis naturam mansit vivus. » Habes igitur duas Christi naturas formaliter distinctas, earumdemque distinctas operationes in divo Hippolyto assertas conspicis. Demonstrandum superest, vetustum hunc Ecclesiae Patrem, unam agnovisse in Christo personam, unumque principium operationum omnium, quae utrique naturae conveniunt.
worked, nothing human by divinity carried on. But although He died as man, nevertheless according to the nature of divinity He remained alive." You have therefore the two natures of Christ formally distinct, and you behold the distinct operations of the same asserted in St Hippolytus. It remains to be demonstrated that this ancient Father of the Church acknowledged one person in Christ, and one principle of all operations which belong to each nature.
Id vero evidentissime constabit unicuique vel leviter attendenti quos superius attulimus textus, ut distinctionem duarum naturarum assertam a divo Hippolyto evinceremus; ex illis enim probe manifestum erit, quod licet duarum naturarum distinctio perspicue asseratur, nihilominus una tantum in Christo persona astruitur.
Now that will be most evidently established to anyone even lightly attending to the texts which we brought forward above in order to prove the distinction of the two natures asserted by St Hippolytus; for from them it will be thoroughly manifest that, although the distinction of the two natures is clearly asserted, nevertheless only one person is established in Christ.
Unitas personae in Jesu Christo. — Ipse quippe et perfectus Deus est, et perfectus homo; ipse prout Dei Verbum, divinam habebat naturam, prout vero Adae filius, habebat naturam humanam: Deus incarnatus est, « Deus incorporatus; » et ille ipse est, qui natus est... Deus et homo: idem est, qui « ab Herode spernitur, et ab angelis adoratur; » qui « divina operatur et humana, » qui « moritur, et manet vivus. » Quomodo conciliari haec possunt cum distinctione naturarum? Audi eumdem divum Hippolytum perbelle hoc explicantem: « Secundum utrumque suum semper permanens sine casu, quibus divine pariter et humane operatus est... » Et alibi: « Sibimet modum servans secundum utrumque immutabilem, per quem operatus est utraque decenti more. » Ex omnibus his quae modo attulimus quoad incarnationem, inferendum est, divum Hippolytum in suis scriptis manifeste damnare tres primarias haereses post ejus mortem exortas: Eutychianorum scilicet, Monothelitarum et Nestorianorum: primam quidem, dum astruit in Christo duas naturas distinctas; secundam vero, dum duas admittit voluntates in eodem Christo, duasque operationes, quae duarum naturarum sunt propriae; tertiam tandem, dum unitatem personae in Christo tuetur.
Unity of person in Jesus Christ. — For He Himself is both perfect God and perfect man; He Himself, according as He is the Word of God, had a divine nature, and according as He is the son of Adam, had a human nature: He is God incarnate, "God embodied;" and He is that very One Who was born... God and man: He is the same Who "is despised by Herod, and is adored by the angels;" Who "works divine things and human things," Who "dies, and remains alive." How can these things be reconciled with the distinction of natures? Hear the same St Hippolytus very finely explaining this: "Permanently remaining always without lapse according to each of His own, by which He worked divinely and humanly alike..." And elsewhere: "Preserving for Himself a mode immutable according to each, through which He worked both in a fitting manner." From all these things which we have just brought forward as regards the incarnation, it must be inferred that St Hippolytus in his writings manifestly condemns the three primary heresies that arose after his death: namely, those of the Eutychians, the Monothelites, and the Nestorians: the first indeed, while he establishes in Christ two distinct natures; the second, while he admits two wills in the same Christ, and two operations which are proper to the two natures; the third finally, while he upholds the unity of person in Christ.
Scopus incarnationis. Circumstantiae incarnationis. — Finis ac scopus incarnationis fuit hominum
Aim of the incarnation. Circumstances of the incarnation. — The end and aim of the incarnation was the salvation of men;
Editors' notes and page, col. 366
Footnotes
(89) ‹anchor: hoc explicantem› · call in col 366
Idem, Contra Beron., tom. I, pag. 228, et apud Galland., col. 468, num. 4.
The same, Against Beron, vol. I, p. 228, and in Gallandi, col. 468, no. 4.
(printed under page 193)
(90) ‹anchor: decenti more› · call in col 366
Id., ibid., pag. 230, et apud Galland., col. 469, num. 8.
The same, in the same place, p. 230, and in Gallandi, col. 469, no. 8.
(printed under page 193)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 366
- marginal letters: A operabatur, nihil humanum; B festum erit, quod licet; C casu, quibus divine; D nis. — Finis ac scopus
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: operabatur, nihil humanum (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
salus; hinc « Verbum e coelis descendit... ut... salvaret Adam, qui ceciderat, et immortalitatem largiretur iis qui crederent in nomine ejus... Neque caro per se sine Verbo subsistere poterat; quia in Verbo habebat subsistentiam, τὴν σύστασιν. Incarnato Verbo et facto homine, Pater erat in Filio, et Filius in Patre... Non per fictionem, sed vere factus est homo. » Haec incarnatio peracta est in Virginis utero, operante Spiritu sancto: et error est opinari, Verbum aut aliunde quam de sinu Virginis carnem sumpsisse, aut carnem hanc de coelo traxisse; cum ante incarnationem nullum corpus haberet, essetque purus spiritus. Prophetae utique Filium Dei appellaverunt etiam Filium hominis, sed per anticipationem, scilicet propter futuram ejus incarnationem: « Vocatus a principio Filius hominis, propter futurum, quamvis nondum esset homo. » Et alibi: « Qualem igitur Filium suum Deus per carnem misit, nisi Verbum, quod a principio scilicet Filium vocavit, quia futurum erat ut ortum caperet? Et cum Filius vocatur, commune nomen amoris erga homines sumit. »
hence "the Word descended from the heavens... that... He might save Adam, who had fallen, and might bestow immortality upon those who should believe in His name... Nor could the flesh by itself subsist without the Word; because it had its subsistence, its constitution, in the Word. When the Word was incarnate and made man, the Father was in the Son, and the Son in the Father... Not by fiction, but truly was He made man." This incarnation was accomplished in the womb of the Virgin, the Holy Spirit working: and it is an error to suppose either that the Word took flesh from elsewhere than from the bosom of the Virgin, or that He drew this flesh from heaven; since before the incarnation He had no body, and was pure spirit. The prophets certainly called the Son of God also the Son of man, yet by anticipation, namely on account of His future incarnation: "Called from the beginning the Son of man, on account of the future, although He was not yet man." And elsewhere: "What sort of Son of His own, therefore, did God send through the flesh, save the Word, Whom from the beginning indeed He called Son, because it was to be that He should take His origin? And when He is called Son, He takes a common name of love towards men."
Christus ex semine David verus Deus omnes salvare vult. — Ex divi Hippolyti insuper doctrina colligimus, quod Deus omnes homines salvare velit, quod Dominus noster Jesus Christus sit verus Deus Patri coaeternus, ipse in Patre, et Pater in Christo sit; quod Pater omnem potestatem eidem dederit, et eumdem constituerit judicem ac regem omnium creaturarum in coelis, in terris et in inferis; quod voluntas Patris sit ipse Christus. Dum vero de Filii temporali nativitate loquitur, in suspicionem venit S. episcopus Portuensis, quasi negare voluisset Christum Filium Dei ex David descendisse, ejusque ex semine factum; ait enim: « Catulum leonis vocavit propheta, qui ex Juda et Davide secundum carnem factus est, non quidem ex Davidis factum semine, sed qui de Spiritu sancto concipiatur, et ex sancto germine e terra procederet. » Verum, ut optime Tillemontius
Christ from the seed of David, true God, wills to save all men. — From the doctrine of St Hippolytus besides we gather that God wills to save all men, that our Lord Jesus Christ is true God coeternal with the Father, that He Himself is in the Father, and the Father is in Christ; that the Father has given all power to the same, and has appointed the same to be Judge and King of all creatures in the heavens, on earth, and in the underworld; that Christ Himself is the will of the Father. But while he speaks of the temporal nativity of the Son, the holy bishop of Portus has fallen under suspicion, as though he had wished to deny that Christ the Son of God descended from David and was made from his seed; for he says: "The prophet called Him a lion's whelp (Gen. 49:9), Who was made according to the flesh from Judah and David, not indeed made from the seed of David, but Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit, and proceeded from a holy shoot out of the earth." But, as Tillemont very well
Editors' notes and page, col. 367
Footnotes
(11) ‹anchor: vocavit propheta› · call in col 367
Gen. XLIX, 9.
Genesis 49:9.
(printed under page 194)
(91) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
S. Hippolyt., Contra Noet., num. 17.
St Hippolytus, Against Noetus, no. 17.
(printed under page 194)
(92) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, ibid., num. 16 et num. 4.
The same, in the same place, no. 16 and no. 4.
(printed under page 194)
(93) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, ibid., num. 4.
The same, in the same place, no. 4.
(printed under page 194)
(94) ‹anchor: homines sumit› · call in col 367
Idem, ibid., num. 15.
The same, in the same place, no. 15.
(printed under page 194)
(95) ‹anchor: salvare velit› · call in col 367
« Omnes vult, omnes salvare desiderat. » S. Hippolyt., De Antich., num. 3.
"He wills all, he desires to save all." St Hippolytus, On Antichrist, no. 3.
(printed under page 194)
(96) ‹anchor: verus Deus› · call in col 367
« Hæc omnia Christus œconomice tanquam homo precabatur, qui erat verus Deus. » Idem, Contra Judæos, num. 4.
"All this Christ prayed by way of the economy, as man, he who was true God." The same, Against the Jews, no. 4.
(printed under page 194)
(97) ‹anchor: Patri coæternus› · call in col 367
« Filium auctoris beneficiorum interfecerunt, ipse enim est coæternus Patri : Τῷ Πατρὶ συναΐδιος. » Idem, ibid., num. 7.
"They killed the Son of the author of their benefits, for he is coeternal with the Father: 'coeternal with the Father.'" The same, in the same place, no. 7.
(printed under page 194)
(98) ‹anchor: Christo sit› · call in col 367
« In quo autem est Deus, nisi in Christo Jesu, Verbo Patris, et mysterio œconomiæ, id est incarnationis?... Quod autem dixit, in te est Deus, ostendit mysterium œconomiæ, id est incarnationis, quod, incarnato Verbo et facto homine, Pater erat in Filio, et Filius in Patre, conversante Filio cum hominibus. » Idem, Contr. Noet., num. 4.
"But in whom is God, if not in Christ Jesus, the Word of the Father, and in the mystery of the economy, that is, of the incarnation?... And when he said, God is in you, he showed the mystery of the economy, that is, of the incarnation: that, the Word being incarnate and made man, the Father was in the Son and the Son in the Father, while the Son lived among men." The same, Against Noetus, no. 4.
(printed under page 194)
(99) ‹anchor: eidem dederit› · call in col 367
« Omnem potestatem ostendit, quæ a Patre data est Filio, qui cœlestium, terrestrium et infernorum rex omniumque judex creatus est. Cœlestium quidem, quod Verbum Patris ante sæcula exstiterit; terrestrium vero, quod homo inter homines natus est, ut a se ipse Adamum reformaret; infernorum autem, quod inter mortuos reputatus, sanctorum animabus prædicans, morte victor mortis exstitit. » Idem, De Antichr., num. 26.
"He shows all the power given by the Father to the Son, who was made king of things in heaven, on earth and under the earth, and judge of all. Of things in heaven, because he existed as the Word of the Father before the ages; of things on earth, because he was born a man among men, to refashion Adam through himself; and of things under the earth, because, counted among the dead and preaching to the souls of the saints, by death he became the conqueror of death." The same, On Antichrist, no. 26.
(printed under page 194)
(1) ‹anchor: ipse Christus› · call in col 367
« Voluntas Patris est Jesus Christus. » Idem, Contr. Noet., num. 13.
"The will of the Father is Jesus Christ." The same, Against Noetus, no. 13.
(printed under page 194)
(2) ‹anchor: ait enim› · call in col 367
Hippolyt., lib. de Antichr., num. 8.
Hippolytus, the book On Antichrist, no. 8.
(printed under page 194)
(3) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Tillemont, Mémoir., tom. III, not. 6 sur S. Hippolyt., pag. 343.
Tillemont, Mémoires, vol. III, note 6 on St Hippolytus, p. 343.
(printed under page 194)
(4) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
« Dic mihi, o beata Maria, quid erat a te in utero conceptum, et quid a te gestabatur in virginali matrice? Verbum erat Dei. » Hippolyt. apud Theodoret., Dialog. 1, et tom. I Opp., pag. 267.
"Tell me, O blessed Mary, what was conceived by you in the womb, and what was carried by you in your virgin womb? It was the Word of God." Hippolytus in Theodoret, Dialogue 1, and Works vol. I, p. 267.
(printed under page 194)
(5) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem in illud : Sapientia ædificavit. Proverb. IX, 1; tom. I Opp., pag. 282.
The same on the passage, Wisdom has built, Proverbs 9:1; Works vol. I, p. 282.
(printed under page 194)
(6) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Vide articul. præcedent.
See the preceding article.
(printed under page 194)
Page
- running head: 367 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A salus (91); hinc « Verbum; B turam ejus incarnationem:; C ac regem omnium creaturarum; D (95) « Omnes vult,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek phrase τὴν σύστασιν); editors' matter: salus; hinc « Verbum (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
notat, ex iis, quae statim sequuntur, quisque perspicere potest, S. Patrem ex stirpe quidem Davidica ortum Jesum Christum agnoscere; ita tamen, ut neget ipsum ea ortum « ex Davidis semine » ratione vulgari, qua caeteri homines, quippe « qui de Spiritu sancto conceptus fuerit, et ex sancto germine e terra processerit. »
notes, from those things which immediately follow, anyone can perceive that the holy Father acknowledges Jesus Christ to have sprung indeed from the stock of David, yet in such a way as to deny that He sprang from it "from the seed of David" in the common manner in which other men do, inasmuch as "He was conceived of the Holy Spirit, and proceeded from a holy shoot out of the earth."
ARTICULUS VII.
ARTICLE VII.
DE BEATAE MARIAE VIRGINITATE ET MATERNITATE.
ON THE VIRGINITY AND MATERNITY OF BLESSED MARY.
Quanquam sanctus Hippolytus nullibi beatissimam Virginem Mariam titulo Deiparae (Θεοτόκος) insigniat, nihilominus tamen ejusmodi passim utitur loquendi formulis, ex quibus luce meridiana clarius patescit, sanctum episcopum beatam Virginem et Matrem Dei credidisse, et ut talem veneratum fuisse. Etenim disertis verbis profitetur, Mariam Dei Verbum in utero et concepisse et gestasse, « Salvatorem ex ea natum, et sine confusione Deum et hominem; » atque Jesum Christum esse verum Deum ac hominem.
Although St Hippolytus nowhere distinguishes the most blessed Virgin Mary by the title Mother of God (Theotokos), nevertheless he everywhere uses such formulas of speaking, from which it is clearer than the midday light that the holy bishop both believed the blessed Virgin to be the Mother of God, and venerated her as such. For in express words he professes that Mary both conceived and bore the Word of God in her womb, "that the Saviour was born from her, and without confusion God and man;" and that Jesus Christ is true God and man.
Idem quoque sanctus Pater in beatissima Virgine Maria perpetuam illius virginitatem egregie commendat, dum ita scribit: « Universorum conditor ex sanctissima semper Virgine Maria per conceptionem inviolabilem sine conversibilitate substantians sibimet animam intellectualem cum sensitivo corpore, natura factus est homo. » Singularis autem S. Hippolyti erga Deiparam pietas, quae haereditario quodam jure ipsi cessit, quaeve ex apostolo Joanne in Polycarpum, ex Polycarpo in Irenaeum, ex Irenaeo in Hippolytum, caeterosque fuit propagata, apparet ex hisce ejusdem praeclaris verbis: « Quo tempore adveniens Salvator ex Virgine (arca auro mundo deaurata, intus quidem Verbo, foris verbo Spiritu sancto) suum corpus mundo protulit; adeo, ut veritas demonstrata sit, et manifestata arca. » Paria autem ex Hippolyti scriptis in psalmum XXII servavit Theodoretus, Dialog. 1, pag. 36, tom. IV edit. Sirmondianae: « Porro autem arca ex lignis quae putrescere non
The same holy Father also in the most blessed Virgin Mary excellently commends her perpetual virginity, when he writes thus: "The Creator of all things, from the most holy ever-Virgin Mary through an inviolable conception without mutability substantiating for Himself an intellectual soul with a sensitive body, by nature became man." Moreover, the singular piety of St Hippolytus towards the Mother of God, which came to him by a certain hereditary right, or which was propagated from the apostle John to Polycarp, from Polycarp to Irenaeus, and from Irenaeus to Hippolytus and the rest, appears from these noble words of the same: "At which time the Saviour, coming from the Virgin (an ark gilded with pure gold, within indeed by the Word, and without by the Holy Spirit), brought forth His own body to the world; so that the truth was demonstrated, and the ark manifested." And like things from the writings of Hippolytus on Psalm 22 Theodoret has preserved, Dialogue 1, page 36, volume 4 of Sirmond's edition: "Moreover the ark was made of woods which cannot rot
Editors' notes and page, col. 368
Footnotes
(7) ‹anchor: factus est homo› · call in col 368
S. Hippolyt., Contra Beronem et Helicem, num. 8, p. 469, apud Galland., et 259 apud Fabric.
St Hippolytus, Against Beron and Helix, no. 8, p. 469 in Gallandi, and 259 in Fabricius.
(printed under page 194)
(8) ‹anchor: præclaris verbis› · call in col 368
S. Hippolyti Interpretatio in Danielem, num. 6, pag. 101, in Daniele secundum LXX, Romæ, 1772.
St Hippolytus, Interpretation of Daniel, no. 6, p. 101, in Daniel according to the Seventy, Rome, 1772.
(printed under page 194)
(9) ‹anchor: edit. Sirmondianæ› · call in col 368
Hippolytus apud Fabric., tom. I Opp., p. 268, et apud Gallandium, tomo II Biblioth. PP., col. 496.
Hippolytus in Fabricius, Works vol. I, p. 268, and in Gallandi, Bibliotheca Patrum vol. II, col. 496.
(printed under page 194)
Page
- running head: SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 358
- marginal letters: A notat (3), ex iis, quae; B tum fuisse. Etenim disertis; C stolo Joanne in Polycarpum,; D tis exstitit. » Idem,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek word Θεοτόκος); editors' matter: notat, ex iis, ARTICULUS VII. (Lumper's dissertation)
poterant, erat ipse Salvator. Per hanc enim putredinis et corruptionis expers ejus tabernaculum significabatur, quod nullam peccati putredinem genuit... Dominus autem a peccato alienus erat, et ex lignis putrefactioni non obnoxiis secundum hominem, hoc est, ex Virgine et Spiritu sancto, intus et foris tanquam purissimo Verbi Dei auro circumtectus. » Eadem fere e sancto Irenaeo habet sanctus Joannes Damascenus contra Jacobitas.
could not, was the Saviour Himself. For by this His tabernacle free from rot and corruption was signified, which engendered no rot of sin... For the Lord was foreign to sin, and of woods not subject to putrefaction according to man, that is, from the Virgin and the Holy Spirit, covered round about within and without as if with the purest gold of the Word of God." Almost the same things from St Irenaeus has St John of Damascus against the Jacobites.
ARTICULUS VIII.
ARTICLE VIII.
DE BAPTISMO ET EUCHARISTIA.
ON BAPTISM AND THE EUCHARIST.
Baptismi effectus. — Sanctus martyr ac episcopus Hippolytus suis in scriptis de duobus duntaxat sacramentis, Baptismo nimirum et Eucharistia, mentionem fecit; verum reliqua nullibi expresse e sacramentorum numero exclusit. Docet autem per sacramentum Baptismatis nos obtinere immortalitatem et vitam spiritualem, a servitute ac captivitate daemonis nos liberari, et induere adoptionem filiorum Dei. « Pater igitur immortalitatis, inquit, immortalem Filium ac Verbum in mundum misit, qui venit ad homines, loturus eos aqua et Spiritu, et regeneraturus ad animae corporisque incorruptibilitatem, inspiravit in nos spiritum vitae, et incorruptibili armatura induit. Si igitur homo factus immortalis est, Deus etiam erit. Si vero per aquam et Spiritum sanctum a regeneratione ex lavacro Deus fit, comperietur etiam post resurrectionem e mortuis cohaeres Christi esse. Igitur praeconis voce proclamo: Venite, omnes tribus gentium ad Baptismatis immortalitatem: Vitam vobis, qui in ignorantiae caligine versati adhuc estis, fausto significo nuntio; venite ex servitute in libertatem, ex tyrannide ad regnum, ex corruptione ad incorruptibilitatem. Et quomodo, inquit, veniemus? Quomodo? per aquam et Spiritum sanctum. Haec est aqua cum Spiritu conjuncta, qua paradisus rigatur, terra pinguescit, atque ut omnia compendio amplectar, per aquam generatus homo vivificatur, qua Christus baptizatus est, in quam Spiritus sanctus columbae specie descendit. ... Accede ergo, et regenerare, o homo! ad adoptionem filiorum Dei. Et quomodo? inquit. Si non adulterium nec caedem commiseris, nec idola colueris, id est, habitum et affectum ad haec, et alia crimina fructum Baptismi impedientia abjeceris: si non vincaris a voluptate, si non committas, ut
Effects of Baptism. — The holy martyr and bishop Hippolytus in his writings made mention of two sacraments only, namely Baptism and the Eucharist; yet nowhere did he expressly exclude the rest from the number of the sacraments. Now he teaches that through the sacrament of Baptism we obtain immortality and spiritual life, are set free from the servitude and captivity of the demon, and put on the adoption of the sons of God. "The Father of immortality therefore," he says, "sent His immortal Son and Word into the world, Who came to men, about to wash them with water and the Spirit, and about to regenerate them to incorruptibility of soul and body, breathed into us the spirit of life, and clothed us with incorruptible armour. If therefore man has become immortal, he will also be God. And if through water and the Holy Spirit from regeneration out of the laver he becomes God, he will also be found after the resurrection from the dead to be a co-heir of Christ. Therefore with the voice of a herald I proclaim: Come, all tribes of the nations, to the immortality of Baptism: Life to you, who are still wrapped in the darkness of ignorance, I announce with glad tidings; come out of servitude into liberty, out of tyranny to a kingdom, out of corruption to incorruptibility. And how, says one, shall we come? How? Through water and the Holy Spirit. This is the water conjoined with the Spirit, by which paradise is watered, the earth is made fat, and, that I may embrace all things in a summary, man generated through water is made alive, in which Christ was baptized, into which the Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove. ... Draw near therefore, and be regenerated, O man, unto the adoption of the sons of God! And how? says one. If you have committed neither adultery nor murder, nor worshipped idols," that is, have cast away the habit and affection towards these and other crimes that hinder the fruit of Baptism: "if you are not overcome by pleasure, if you do not allow
Editors' notes and page, col. 369
Footnotes
(10) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
S. Hippolyt. Homil. in Theophan., num. 8, pag. 264, apud Fabric., tom. I Opp., et apud Galland., tom. II, col. 494.
St Hippolytus, Homily on the Theophany, no. 8, p. 264, in Fabricius, Works vol. I, and in Gallandi, vol. II, col. 494.
(printed under page 195)
(11) ‹anchor: idola colueris› · call in col 369
En tria illa capitaliora, et apud primos Christianos expertia propemodum veniæ crimina, idololatriam, homicidium et adulterium. Prima fronte illa S. Hippolyti verba : « Accede igitur, et regenerare, o homo... Si non adulterium, nec cædem commiseris, nec idola colueris, » videri possent a Baptismi gratia eos abigere, qui talium criminum rei sunt. Si vero hujus Patris mens attente perpendatur, omnis illico evanescet difficultas; primo enim omnes gentes ad hoc sacramentum invitat : « Venite, omnes tribus gentium, ad Baptismatis immortalitatem; » quod sane et idolorum cultores, et adulteros, etc., præsupponit. 2° Nullum est crimen, quantumvis enorme, quod divino hoc sacramento non deleatur juxta Isaiæ textum, quem de Baptismo interpretatur S. Hippolytus, uti supra vidimus. Ergo sacramentum hoc delet idololatriam, adulterium, etc. Igitur sanctus martyr id unum intendit, oportere scilicet abjicere habitum et affectum ad hæc crimina, uti et ad cætera omnia, ut Baptismi gratia obtineatur; quod quidem verum est, et cum Ecclesiæ doctrina apprime congruit.
Here are those three graver crimes, all but excluded from pardon among the first Christians: idolatry, murder and adultery. At first sight those words of St Hippolytus, "Come then, and be born again, O man... If you have not committed adultery or murder, nor worshipped idols," might seem to drive away from the grace of Baptism those who are guilty of such crimes. But if this Father's meaning is weighed attentively, every difficulty at once vanishes. First, he invites all nations to this sacrament: "Come, all you tribes of the nations, to the immortality of Baptism"; which surely presupposes worshippers of idols, adulterers and the rest. Second, there is no crime, however enormous, that is not blotted out by this divine sacrament, according to the text of Isaiah, which St Hippolytus interprets of Baptism, as we saw above. Therefore this sacrament blots out idolatry, adultery and the rest. So the holy martyr means only this: that one must cast off the habit of and attachment to these crimes, as to all others, to obtain the grace of Baptism; which is indeed true, and agrees perfectly with the Church's teaching.
(printed under page 195)
(12) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, loc. cit., num. 6.
The same, in the place cited, no. 6.
(printed under page 195)
Page
- running head: 369 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A poterant, erat ipse; B cramentorum numero exclusit.; C proclamo: Venite, omnes; D alia crimina fructum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: poterant, erat ipse, ARTICULUS VIII. (Lumper's dissertation)
affectus superbiae tibi dominetur; si sordes impuritatis abstergas, et onus peccati a te abjicias; si exuas armaturam diaboli, et induas fidei thoracem. Sicut Isaias, cap. I: « Lavamini, inquit, et quaerite judicium, eripite oppressum, judicate orphano, absolvite viduam, et venite, et disceptemus, ait Dominus. Et si sint peccata vestra sicut puniceus pannus, ut nivem dealbabo; sique fuerint ut coccinum, dealbabo ut lanam. Et quando vultis vocem meam audire, bona terrae comedetis. » Vides. dilecte, quomodo propheta baptismi vim purgativam praedixit; qui enim cum fide in hoc regenerationis lavacrum descendit, renuntiat malo, et Christo se addicit. Hostem abnegat, ac Christum Deum esse confitetur; servitutem exuit, induit adoptionem; redit ex baptismo splendidus, ut sol radios justitiae effulgurans. Quod vero maximum est, revertitur Filius Dei et Christi haeres. »
the affection of pride to domineer over you; if you wipe away the filth of impurity, and cast off the burden of sin from you; if you put off the armour of the devil, and put on the breastplate of faith (Eph. 6:14). Just as Isaiah, chapter 1: 'Wash yourselves,' he says, 'and seek judgement, rescue the oppressed, judge for the fatherless, acquit the widow, and come, and let us reason together, says the Lord. And if your sins be as scarlet cloth, I will make them white as snow; and if they be as crimson, I will make them white as wool. And when you are willing to hear My voice, you shall eat the good things of the land (Isa. 1:16–19).' You see, beloved, how the prophet foretold the purgative power of baptism; for he who descends with faith into this laver of regeneration renounces evil, and devotes himself to Christ. He denies the enemy, and confesses that Christ is God; he puts off servitude, and puts on adoption; he returns from baptism shining, flashing forth like the sun the rays of righteousness. And what is greatest, he returns a Son of God and an heir of Christ."
Fructus baptismi Christi. — Enumerat paulo supra fructus baptismi Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi hoc modo: « Vides, dilecte, quot et quantorum bonorum jacturam facturi fuissemus, si Joannis monitioni Dominus cessisset, et Baptismum non suscepisset. Clausi enim erant antehac coeli, inaccessa supera regio... Statim autem aperti sunt coeli ipsi. Reconciliatio facta visibilium cum invisibilibus, coelestes ordines gaudio sunt impleti, Satanae in terris aegritudines, res absconditae, quae erant, patefactae sunt, quae hostium erant in numero, reddita fuere amica. »
Fruits of the baptism of Christ. — A little above he enumerates the fruits of the baptism of our Saviour Jesus Christ in this manner: "You see, beloved, the loss of how many and how great goods we would have suffered, if the Lord had yielded to the admonition of John, and had not undergone Baptism. For previously the heavens were shut, the upper region inaccessible... But immediately the heavens themselves were opened. Reconciliation was made of visible things with invisible, the heavenly orders were filled with joy, diseases on earth of Satan, things which were hidden were laid open, things which were in the number of enemies were rendered friendly."
Realis Christi in Eucharistia praesentia. Noster panis est Dominus noster Jesus Christus. — Eucharistia, prout docet S. Hippolytus, est sacramentum, quo Jesus Christus divinam ipsius carnem, ac venerabilem ejus sanguinem dedit nobis edendum bibendumque in remissionem peccatorum. En apertum veteris hujus doctoris testimonium, quo realis Christi praesentia in sanctissimo Eucharistiae sacramento contra Calvinistas invictissime demonstratur. Huc spectant etiam, quae legimus in fragmentis ejus Commentarii in Genesim ad ea Scripturae verba: Pinguis ejus panis, et ipse dabit delicias principibus. « Hoc figuram vocationis nostrae interpretamur, ait S. Hippolytus; quod enim pingue, lautum est. Quinam vero panis lautior nostro? Noster enim panis Dominus est, ut ipse ait:
The real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Our bread is our Lord Jesus Christ. — The Eucharist, according as St Hippolytus teaches, is the sacrament whereby Jesus Christ gave His own divine flesh and His venerable blood to us to eat and to drink for the remission of sins. Behold the open testimony of this ancient doctor, whereby the real presence of Christ in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist is most invincibly demonstrated against the Calvinists. To this pertain also the things which we read in the fragments of his Commentary on Genesis upon those words of Scripture: His bread is fat, and he shall give delicacies to princes (Gen. 49:20). "This we interpret as a figure of our calling," says St Hippolytus; "for what is fat is sumptuous. Now what bread is more sumptuous than ours? For our bread is the Lord, as He Himself says:
Editors' notes and page, col. 370
Footnotes
(12, scripture) ‹anchor: fidei thoracem› · call in col 370 Ephes. VI, 14.
Ephesians 6:14.
(13, scripture) ‹anchor: delicias principibus› · call in col 370 Gen. XLIX, 20.
Genesis 49:20.
(printed under page 195)
(12) ‹anchor: hoc modo› · call in col 370
Idem, loc. cit., num. 6.
The same, loc. cit., no. 6.
(printed under page 195)
(13) ‹anchor: remissionem peccatorum› · call in col 370
Idem, tom. I Opp., pag. 282, et apud Galland., tom. II, pag. 488.
The same, Works vol. I, p. 282, and in Gallandi, vol. II, p. 488.
(printed under page 195)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 370
- marginal letters: A affectus superbiae tibi; B nem; redit ex baptismo; C Realis Christi in; D gue, lautum est.
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: affectus superbiae tibi (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
Ego sum panis vitae. Ecquis vero alius dabit cibum principibus, quam Dominus noster Jesus Christus? Non tantum iis qui credunt e gentibus, sed etiam ex circumcisione, qui principatum tenent in fide, hoc est patribus et patriarchis, et prophetis, omnibusque credentibus in nomen ejus ac passionem. »
I am the bread of life (John 6:35, 48). And who else will give food to princes, than our Lord Jesus Christ? Not only to those who believe from the nations, but also from the circumcision, who hold the chief place in faith, that is, to the fathers and patriarchs, and prophets, and to all who believe in His name and passion."
Eucharistia corpus Christi et sacrificium mundum ac incruentum. — Hoc corpus, ac venerabilis sanguis quotidie super nostra altaria offeruntur in memoriam primae coenae: « Quae in arcana et divina mensa, inquit S. Hippolytus, quotidie perficiuntur et sanctificantur, in memoriam nunquam non recolendae memoriae primae illius divinae et arcanae coenae. » In opere, quod inscribitur De charismatibus traditio apostolica, Eucharistiam vocat sacrificium mundum ac incruentum ab episcopis et presbyteris duntaxat offerendum. En illius verba: « Primus igitur natura Pontifex unigenitus Christus non sibi honorem rapuit, sed a Patre constitutus est; qui factus homo propter nos, et spirituale sacrificium offerens ipsi Deo ac Patri ante passionem, nobis constituit solis hoc facere, licet nobiscum essent alii consimiles quoque, qui in eum crediderunt: verum non statim ac aliquis credidit, jam et sacerdos constitutus fuit, aut dignitatem pontificalem obtinet. Sed post assumptionem illius nos juxta ejusdem constitutionem offerentes sacrificium mundum ac incruentum elegimus episcopos et presbyteros et diaconos numero septem. Ex his (septem) unus erat Stephanus, beatus martyr... Nusquam cernitur iis usus esse (Stephanus), quae officio diaconi non convenirent; non sacrificium obtulisse, aut manus cuipiam imposuisse, sed diaconi ordinem usque ad finem custodisse. » Desumpsimus haec ex Διδασκαλίᾳ apostolorum, quae vulgo S. nostro Hippolyto ascribitur.
The Eucharist the body of Christ and a pure and unbloody sacrifice. — This body and venerable blood are offered daily upon our altars in memory of the first supper: "Which upon the mystic and divine table," says St Hippolytus, "are daily accomplished and sanctified, in memory of the never to be forgotten memory of that first divine and mystic supper." In the work which is entitled Apostolic Tradition on Charisms, he calls the Eucharist a pure and unbloody sacrifice to be offered by bishops and presbyters alone. Behold his words: "First therefore by nature High Priest, the only-begotten Christ did not seize the honour for Himself, but was appointed by the Father; Who having become man on our account, and offering a spiritual sacrifice to God and the Father Himself before His passion, appointed us alone to do this, although there were with us others like us also, who believed in Him: yet not as soon as anyone believed was he already also appointed a priest, or obtains pontifical dignity. But after His assumption we, offering according to His appointment a pure and unbloody sacrifice, chose bishops and presbyters and deacons, seven in number. Of these (seven) one was Stephen, the blessed martyr... Nowhere is he (Stephen) seen to have used those things which did not befit the office of a deacon; neither to have offered sacrifice, nor to have laid hands upon anyone, but to have kept the order of a deacon unto the end." We have taken these things from the Didascalia of the Apostles, which is commonly ascribed to our St Hippolytus.
ARTICULUS IX.
ARTICLE IX.
DE NATURA ANGELORUM ET ANIMARUM, RESURRECTIONE MORTUORUM, EXTREMO JUDICIO, PRAEMIO AC SUPPLICIO PROBORUM ET IMPROBORUM, MUNDIQUE INTERITU.
ON THE NATURE OF ANGELS AND SOULS, THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD, THE LAST JUDGEMENT, THE REWARD AND PUNISHMENT OF THE GOOD AND THE WICKED, AND THE DESTRUCTION OF THE WORLD.
Status hominum post resurrectionem. Angeli et animae immortales ac incorruptibiles. — Sanctus Hippolytus statum hominum post resurrectionem ita depingit: « Erunt, inquit S. Hippolytus, homines in resurrectione sicut angeli Dei, nimirum corruptionis expertes, immortales, nihil defluxu aliquo deperdere soliti; nam immortalis natura non generat, non generatur, non augetur, non dormit, non esurit, non sitit, non fatigatur, non patitur,
State of men after the resurrection. Angels and souls immortal and incorruptible. — St Hippolytus thus depicts the state of men after the resurrection: "Men in the resurrection," says St Hippolytus, "will be as the angels of God, namely free from corruption, immortal, accustomed to lose nothing by any waste; for an immortal nature does not beget, is not begotten, does not increase, does not sleep, does not hunger, does not thirst, is not wearied, does not suffer,
Editors' notes and page, col. 371
Footnotes
(14, scripture) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images) Joan. VI, 35, 48.
John 6:35, 48.
(printed under page 196)
(14) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Hippolyt., Fragment. ex Commentar. in Genesin, tom. II, pag. 28, et apud Galland., l. c., col. 481.
Hippolytus, fragment from the Commentary on Genesis, vol. II, p. 28, and in Gallandi, in the place cited, col. 481.
(printed under page 196)
(15) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
« Et paravit mensam suam, promissam sanctæ Trinitatis cognitionem, nec non venerandum sanctumque ejus corpus, ac sanguinem, quæ in arcana, et divina mensa quotidie perficiuntur, et sacrificantur in memoriam nunquam non recolendæ memoriæ primæ illius, et divinæ et arcanæ cœnæ. » S. Hippolyt., in illud Proverb. IX, 1 : Sapientia ædificavit; Fabr., tom. I Opp., pag. 282, et apud Galland., tom. II, col. 488.
"And she has prepared her table: the promised knowledge of the Holy Trinity, and also his venerable and holy body and blood, which are daily consummated and sacrificed on the mystical and divine table, in memory of that first, divine and mystical supper, ever to be remembered." St Hippolytus, on Proverbs 9:1, Wisdom has built; Fabricius, Works vol. I, p. 282, and in Gallandi, vol. II, col. 488.
(printed under page 196)
(16) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Tom. I Opp. S. Hippolyt., apud Fabric., pag. 258 et 259, et apud Galland., tom. II, col. 512 et 513.
Works of St Hippolytus vol. I, in Fabricius, pp. 258 and 259, and in Gallandi, vol. II, cols. 512 and 513.
(printed under page 196)
(17) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
S. Hippolyt., tractat. De resurrectione, tom. I Opp., pag. 244, et apud Galland., tom. II, col. 495.
St Hippolytus, the treatise On the Resurrection, Works vol. I, p. 244, and in Gallandi, vol. II, col. 495.
(printed under page 196)
Page
- running head: 371 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A Ego sum panis vitae; B rismatibus traditio apostolica,; C his (septem) unus; D ita depingit: « Erunt,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek word Διδασκαλίᾳ); editors' matter: Ego sum panis, ARTICULUS IX. (Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: pati-[tur]
non moritur, neque a clavis et lancea perforatur, non sudat, non fundit sanguinem. » Ejusmodi naturis constant angeli, et animae corporeis vinculis exsolutae; ambae enim istae naturae sunt alterius generis, et diversae a creaturis hujus mundi, quae sub aspectum cadunt, et corruptioni subjiciuntur.
does not die, nor is pierced by nails and lance, does not sweat, does not pour forth blood." Of such natures consist angels, and souls released from bodily bonds; for both those natures are of another kind, and different from the creatures of this world, which fall under sight and are subjected to corruption.
Ex his clarissime eruitur, divum Hippolytum agnovisse animam natura sua immortalem; et angelos uti substantias pure spirituales, et a materia omnino secretas: quae quidem duae essentiales veritates aliqua involvuntur obscuritate in omnibus ferme scriptoribus sacris, qui ante ipsum floruerunt.
From these things it is most clearly elicited that St Hippolytus acknowledged the soul to be immortal by its own nature, and the angels to be purely spiritual substances, and altogether separated from matter: which two essential truths indeed are wrapped in some obscurity in almost all the sacred writers who flourished before him.
Resurrectio generalis. — Animae quoque immortalitatem diserte astruit vetustus hic Pater, dum resurrectionem generalem adversus Platonem probat ita disserens: « In quo continentur omnium animae, usque ad tempus quod Deus determinavit, tunc omnium resurrectionem facturus, non animas ex corpore in corpus aliud detrudendo, sed eadem ipsa corpora iterum excitando. Quae dissoluta videntes, si fidem denegatis, o Graeci, discite non esse increduli. Animam enim credentes factam, et immortalem a Deo conditam secundum sententiam Platonis, in tempore; non debetis non credere, quod Deus potens est, ex iisdem elementis compositum et factum, ad vitam illud revocans, immortale reddere: illud enim possibile, hoc vero impossibile non dicetur de Deo. Nos ergo credimus corpus resurrecturum. Si enim corrumpitur, non omnino perditur; terra enim recipiens illius reliquias, illas servat, et efflorescunt factae instar seminis, et terrae pinguedini implicatae, et immersae; et seminatum quidem granum, nudum seminatur, ad imperium vero Dei Creatoris florens, indutum et gloriosum exsurgit, non ante quam moriens dissolvatur, et terrae commisceatur. Adeo ut non vane credamus resurrectionem corporum. Nam etiamsi ad tempus solvatur corpus, propter primam ab initio transgressionem perpetratam; tanquam in conflatorio terrae mandatur, rursum aliquando reformandum: non tale, quale nunc, resurrecturum, sed purum, et non amplius corruptioni obnoxium. Et cuilibet corpori sua propria anima reddetur; et illo induta, non moerore marcescet, sed cum illo gaudebit, pura purum inhabitans. Cui nunc in mundo juste comes facta, et non habens in ulla re illum insidiatorem, rapietur, et accipietur cum omni gaudio. Injusti vero non immutata assument
General resurrection. — This ancient Father also expressly establishes the immortality of the soul, while he proves the general resurrection against Plato, discoursing thus: "In which are contained the souls of all, until the time which God has determined, being then about to effect the resurrection of all, not by thrusting souls from body into another body, but by raising up again the very same bodies. Seeing which dissolved, if you refuse faith, O Greeks, learn not to be unbelieving. For believing the soul to be made, and created immortal by God in time, according to the opinion of Plato, you ought not to disbelieve that God is able, calling back to life that which was composed and made out of the same elements, to render it immortal: for the former will not be said to be possible, and the latter impossible with God. We therefore believe that the body will rise again. For if it is corrupted, it is not altogether destroyed; for the earth, receiving its remains, preserves them, and they flourish, having become like seed, and intertwined and immersed in the fatness of the earth; and the sown grain indeed is sown bare, but at the command of God the Creator it rises up flourishing, clothed, and glorious, not before it dies and is dissolved, and is mingled with the earth. So that not in vain do we believe in the resurrection of bodies. For even if for a time the body is dissolved, on account of the first transgression committed from the beginning, it is committed to the earth as in a smelting-furnace, to be moulded anew at some time: about to rise again not such as it is now, but pure, and no longer subject to corruption. And to each body its own proper soul will be restored; and clothed with it, it will not pine away with grief, but will rejoice with it, pure inhabiting the pure. Having now in the world justly become its companion, and not having it in anything as a plotter against it, it will be caught up, and will be received with all joy. But the unjust will receive their bodies unchanged,
Editors' notes and page, col. 372
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 372
- marginal letters: A tur, non moritur, neque; B talitatem diserte astruit; C impossibile non dicetur; D Et cuilibet corpori
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: tur, non moritur, (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [pati]tur
corpora, nec liberata affectibus et morbis, neque illa glorificata accipient, sed in iis, quibus finierunt vitam, morbis, et quales in incredulitate vixerunt, tales certe judicabuntur. » Ex his colligitur sanctum nostrum episcopum conformiter sacrae Scripturae docuisse unumquemque cum proprio corpore esse resurrecturum; corpora justorum gloriosa, impassibilia, corruptionis expertia fore, et una cum anima beata aeternitate fruitura esse; econtra autem corpora impiorum non immutatum iri, iisdemque morbis ac infirmitatibus obnoxia fore, quibus in hoc saeculo fuere obnoxia.
nor freed from passions and diseases, nor will they receive them glorified, but in those diseases in which they ended their life, and such as they lived in unbelief, such certainly will they be judged." From these things it is gathered that our holy bishop conformably to sacred Scripture taught that each one will rise again with his own body; that the bodies of the just will be glorious, impassible, free from corruption, and together with the soul will enjoy a blessed eternity; and on the contrary that the bodies of the wicked will not be changed, and will be subject to the same diseases and infirmities to which they were subject in this age.
Idem corpus resurget. — In Epistola ad Severinam tradit hic S. Pater, nixus auctoritate S. Pauli, idem corpus resurrecturum. « Primitias igitur hunc (Christum) nominat (Paulus I Epist. ad Corinth. XV, 20) dormientium, et primogenitum ex mortuis, qui resurgens et volens ostendere, quod idem hoc esset resuscitatum, quod et mortuum fuerat, dubitantibus discipulis accersens Thomam dixit: Accede huc, tange, et vide, quia spiritus carnem et ossa non habet, sicut me vides habentem. Idem (Paulus) in eadem Epistola appellans ipsum primitias, testimonium nostrae asseverationi perhibuit, quod ex eadem massa carnem assumptam Servator resuscitavit, faciens eam primitias carnis justorum, ut omnes credentes fiducia hujus resuscitati exspectemus futuram resurrectionem. »
The same body will rise again. — In the Epistle to Severina this holy Father hands down, relying on the authority of St Paul, that the same body will rise again. "Therefore he (Paul, 1 Cor. 15:20) names Him (Christ) the firstfruits of those who sleep, and the firstborn from the dead (Col. 1:18), Who rising again and wishing to show that this same had been raised up which had also died, when the disciples doubted, calling Thomas, said (Luke 24:39): Draw near hither, touch, and see, because a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see Me having. The same (Paul) in the same Epistle, calling Him the firstfruits (1 Cor. 15:23), bore witness to our assertion, that the Saviour raised up the flesh assumed from the same mass, making it the firstfruits of the flesh of the just, so that all we who believe, through confidence in this risen One, may await the future resurrection."
Judicium extremum. — De extremo judicio agit S. Hippolytus tum in libro De Antichristo, tum in tractatu adversus Platonem. In hoc scribit de illo: « Quod omnes, sive justi sive injusti, ducentur coram Deo Verbo: illi enim Pater omne judicium dedit, et ille voluntatem Patris implens judex adveniet; ille, inquam, quem nos Christum vocamus: neque enim Minos, aut Rhadamanthus sunt judices, ut secundum vos, ethnici; sed ille, quem Deus et Pater glorificavit, de quo alibi particulatim disseruimus in gratiam eorum qui quaerunt veritatem; ille ipse justum judicium Patris in omnes exercens ordinabit, quod aequum et justum erit, unicuique secundum opera: cujus judicio sistentur omnes, homines, angeli (daemones), et unanimes vocem emittent: Justum est judicium tuum. »
The last judgement. — Of the last judgement St Hippolytus treats both in the book On the Antichrist and in the treatise Against Plato. In the latter he writes of it: "Because all, whether just or unjust, will be led before God the Word: for to Him the Father has given all judgement (John 5:22), and He, fulfilling the will of the Father, will come as Judge; He, I say, Whom we call Christ: for neither Minos nor Rhadamanthus are judges, as according to you, O Gentiles; but He Whom God and the Father has glorified, concerning Whom we have discoursed in detail elsewhere for the sake of those who seek the truth; He Himself, exercising the just judgement of the Father upon all, will ordain what shall be equitable and just, to each one according to his works: at Whose judgement all will be set, men and angels (demons), and with one accord will utter the voice: Just is Thy judgement."
Praemium bonorum, et poena malorum. — « Hujus vocis aequitas, prosequitur S. Hippolytus, apparet in retributione in utroque, cum benefacientibus juste fruitio aeterna praebeatur, malorum vero cupidis aeternum supplicium distribuatur, et expendatur. Et hos manet ignis inexstinguibilis, et qui nunquam finietur, et vermis igneus non moriens, non corpus
The reward of the good, and the punishment of the wicked. — "The equity of this voice," continues St Hippolytus, "appears in the retribution in each case, when to those who do well eternal enjoyment is justly afforded, while to those who are desirous of evil things eternal punishment is distributed and meted out. And for these there awaits an unquenchable fire, and one which will never end, and a fiery worm that dies not (Isa. 66:24; Mark 9:44, 45), not corrupting
Editors' notes and page, col. 373
Footnotes
(15, scripture) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images) Coloss. I, 18.
Colossians 1:18.
(16, scripture) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images) Luc. XXIV, 39.
Luke 24:39.
(17, scripture) ‹anchor: ipsum primitias› · call in col 373 I Cor. XV, 23.
1 Corinthians 15:23.
(18, scripture) ‹anchor: judicium dedit› · call in col 373 Joan. V, 22.
John 5:22.
(19, scripture) ‹anchor: non moriens› · call in col 373 Isa. LXVI, 24; Marc. IX, 44, 45.
Isaiah 66:24; Mark 9:44-45.
(20, scripture) ‹anchor: diligunt illum› · call in col 374 I Cor. II, 9.
1 Corinthians 2:9.
(printed under page 197)
(18) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
S. Hippolyt., lib. adv. Græcos et Platonem, num. 2, tom. I Opp.; Fabric., pag. 221, et apud Galland., colum. 452.
St Hippolytus, the book Against the Greeks and Plato, no. 2, Works vol. I; Fabricius, p. 221, and in Gallandi, col. 452.
(printed under page 197)
(19) ‹anchor: futuram resurrectionem› · call in col 373
S. Hippolyt., apud Theodoret., dialog. 2, pag. 155; apud Fabric., tom. I Opp., pag. 92, et Galland., tom. II, col. 499.
St Hippolytus, in Theodoret, Dialogue 2, p. 155; in Fabricius, Works vol. I, p. 92, and Gallandi, vol. II, col. 499.
(printed under page 197)
(20) ‹anchor: judicium tuum› · call in col 373
S. Hippolyt., adv. Græc. et Platonem, apud Fabric., tom. I, pag. 222, et apud Galland., tom. II Bibl. PP., num. 3, col. 453.
St Hippolytus, Against the Greeks and Plato, in Fabricius, vol. I, p. 222, and in Gallandi, Bibliotheca Patrum vol. II, no. 3, col. 453.
(printed under page 197)
Page
- running head: 373 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A corpora, nec liberata; B hunc (Christum) nominat; C S. Hippolytus tum; D tent: Justum est
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: corpora, nec liberata (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: cor-[pus]
corrumpens, sed irrequieto dolore ex corpore effervescens et ebulliens: illis somnus cessationem et quietem non conciliabit, non nox leniet et mulcebit dolores, non mors supplicia solvet. Non juvabit exhortatio affinium intercessorum; nam justi non amplius ab illis videbuntur, et non sunt illorum memoria digni. Soli enim justi operum justorum erunt memores, per quae pervenerunt ad regnum coeleste, in quo nec somnus, nec dolor, nec corruptio, nec sollicitudo, nec nox, nec dies tempore mensurata, nec sol necessitate quadam per circulum coeli cursum suum agitans, non lunae decursus et incrementum, quae temporum mutationes inducit, et terram madidam reddens. Non sol ardens, non Ursa versatilis, non Orionis ortus, non astrorum errores innumeri, non invia terra, non inventu difficilis paradisi aula, non molestus maris fremitus, impediens, quominus a vectore pedibus calcetur; justis enim et ipsum pervium, etiamsi humido non privetur. Coelum non erit inaccessum hominibus, et via, qua ascendi et scandi possit, non talis erit, quae non possit inveniri. Non terra rudis et inculta, et hominibus laborem, et molestiam creans, sed sponte fructus progeminans ad cultum et ornatum. Non iteratae ferarum generationes, neque aliorum animalium effervescens et ebulliens substantia; neque enim homines tunc rursus generant, sed manet indesinenter numerus justorum cum justis angelis, et spiritibus. His verbis obtemperate, et illa credentes, o homines! eritis justorum consortes, et futurorum bonorum potiemini, quae neque vidit oculus, neque auris audivit, neque ascenderunt in cor hominis, quae praeparavit Deus iis qui diligunt illum. »
the body, but with restless pain boiling up and bubbling forth out of the body: for them sleep will not procure cessation and rest, night will not soothe and assuage their pains, death will not loose their punishments. The exhortation of kindred intercessors will not avail; for the just will no longer be seen by them, and they are not worthy of remembrance by them. For the just alone will be mindful of the just works through which they have arrived at the heavenly kingdom, in which there is neither sleep, nor pain, nor corruption, nor anxiety, nor night, nor day measured by time, nor sun by a certain necessity driving his course through the circle of heaven, nor the waning and waxing of the moon, which brings in the changes of seasons, and rendering the earth moist. No burning sun, no revolving Bear, no rising of Orion, no innumerable wanderings of the stars, no trackless earth, no court of paradise difficult to find, no troublesome roaring of the sea, hindering it from being trodden on foot by the traveller; for to the just even it is passable, even though it be not deprived of moisture. Heaven will not be inaccessible to men, and the way by which it can be ascended and climbed will not be such as cannot be found. The earth will not be rude and uncultivated, creating labour and trouble for men, but of its own accord putting forth fruits for cultivation and adornment. No repeated generations of wild beasts, nor the boiling and bubbling substance of other animals; for neither do men then beget again, but the number of the just remains unceasingly with the just angels and spirits. Obey these words, and believing them, O men, you shall be partakers with the just, and shall obtain the future good things, which neither eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor have ascended into the heart of man, which God has prepared for those who love Him (1 Cor. 2:9)."
In libro autem De Antichristo, num. 63, ex Novi et Veteris Testamenti Scriptura probat S. Hippolytus resurrectionem generalem, praemia et supplicia hominum. Numero autem 64, ita de interitu mundi loquitur: « His itaque futuris .... » ac jam mundi universi « appetente consummatione, quid reliquum est, quam ut Dominus et Salvator noster Jesus Christus Deus in coelis appareat, in quem speravimus? Qui conflagrationem, justumque judicium cunctis inducturus sit, qui in eum non crediderunt. »
Moreover, in the book On the Antichrist, number 63, from the Scripture of the New and Old Testaments St Hippolytus proves the general resurrection, and the rewards and punishments of men. And at number 64, he speaks thus concerning the destruction of the world: "When these things therefore shall be ...." and now when of the whole world "the consummation is drawing near, what remains, save that our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, God, in Whom we have hoped, should appear in the heavens? Who is about to bring in the conflagration and just judgement upon all who have not believed in Him."
ARTICULUS X.
ARTICLE X.
DE ANTICHRISTO.
ON THE ANTICHRIST.
Origo Antichristi. Ejus nomen. — Pro hujus capitis coronide quaedam afferemus divi Hippolyti loca circa Antichristum. Nebulonem hunc ex tribu Dan nasciturum docet sanctus iste episcopus, suamque sententiam firmare studet auctoritate
Origin of the Antichrist. His name. — As a conclusion to this chapter we shall bring forward certain passages of St Hippolytus concerning the Antichrist. That this worthless wretch will be born from the tribe of Dan that holy bishop teaches, and strives to confirm his opinion by the authority
Editors' notes and page, col. 374
Footnotes
(21) ‹anchor: iste episcopus› · call in col 374
S. Hippolytus, lib. De Antichristo, num. 14.
St Hippolytus, the book On Antichrist, no. 14.
(printed under page 197)
Page
- running head: ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 374
- marginal letters: A pus corrumpens, sed; B astrorum errores innumeri,; C credentes, o homines!; D diderunt. »
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: pus corrumpens, ARTICULUS X. (Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [cor]pus
Scripturarum, et praecipue Genesis cap. XLIX, v. 17, et Jeremiae cap. VIII, v. 16. Verum opinio haec ad summum ut simplex conjectura proferri potest; hanc quippe retulisse, refutasse est, ut quilibet probe dignoscet, si vel leviter perpendere velit duo illa Scripturae testimonia, quibus ejus opinio, tota quanta est, innititur. Quoad Antichristi nomen, ea sancto Hippolyto opinio stetit, hoc designari illis Apocalypsis verbis: Et numerus ejus sexcenti sexaginta sex; et licet definire non audeat sanctus episcopus, quodnam nomen ex hoc numero emergere possit, nihilominus ex conjectura opinatur post S. Irenaeum, impostorem hunc fortasse appellari debere hoc nomine: Titan sive Evanthas, sive Latinus; quae quidem conjectura, aeque ac prima, futilis est.
of the Scriptures, and chiefly of Genesis 49:17 and Jeremiah 8:16. Yet this opinion at the most can be put forward as a simple conjecture; for to have related it is to have refuted it, as anyone will thoroughly discern if he is willing even lightly to weigh those two testimonies of Scripture upon which his opinion, in its entirety, rests. As regards the name of the Antichrist, this opinion stood firm with St Hippolytus, that it is designated by those words of the Apocalypse: And his number is six hundred and sixty-six (Rev. 13:18); and although the holy bishop does not dare to define what name can emerge from this number, nevertheless by conjecture he opines after St Irenaeus that this impostor ought perhaps to be called by this name: Titan, or Evanthas, or Latinus; which conjecture indeed, equally with the first, is futile.
Tempus Antichristi. — Non aeque nutat, quod docet idem sanctus martyr de tempore Antichristi adventus; docet quippe hunc iniquitatis virum in fine mundi venturum esse; quod et communiter docet Ecclesia. Caeterum non ille sum ego, qui assentiri possim D. Hippolyto quaedam Scripturae testimonia de praeciso Antichristi adventu interpretanti; veluti cum ait, Antichristum venturum in postrema septuaginta hebdomadarum Danielis: constat enim, ut alibi jam vidimus, hebdomadam hanc finem habuisse in primo Jesu Christi adventu, quo peracto circumstantiae omnes notabilissimae impletae sunt, quas impleri debere in illa hebdomada Scripturae nuntiaverant. Extunc quippe urbs inclyta Jerusalem destructa fuit, templum eversum, sacrificium abolitum, abominatio desolationis fuit in loco sancto; quemadmodum ecclesiastica narrat historia ex fide ipsorum Hebraeorum, qui, cum propriis oculis calamitates illas conspexissent, litteris consignarunt.
Time of the Antichrist. — What the same holy martyr teaches concerning the time of the coming of the Antichrist does not equally waver; for he teaches that this man of iniquity will come at the end of the world; which the Church also commonly teaches. For the rest, I am not the man who could assent to St Hippolytus when he interprets certain testimonies of Scripture concerning the precise coming of the Antichrist; as when he says that the Antichrist will come in the last of the seventy weeks of Daniel: for it is established, as we have already seen elsewhere, that this week had its end in the first coming of Jesus Christ, upon the completion of which all the most notable circumstances were fulfilled which the Scriptures had announced had to be fulfilled in that week. For from that time the renowned city of Jerusalem was destroyed, the temple overthrown, the sacrifice abolished, and the abomination of desolation was in the holy place; just as ecclesiastical history relates on the credit of the Hebrews themselves, who, having beheld those calamities with their own eyes, committed them to writing.
Enoch et Elias. — Nec ultra conjecturae fines vagatur altera haec S. Hippolyti opinio; Enochum scilicet et Eliam prophetas per dimidium septuagesimae hebdomadae pugnaturos cum Antichristo; nec non insumpturos in praedicatione « bis mille, bis centum sexaginta dies; » quod aeque incertum est. Enoch et Elias apparebunt utique Antichristi aetate, homines ad poenitentiam cohortantes, sicuti eodem loco noster hic auctor docet. Verum, quonam praecise tempore apparebunt? Quot diebus terram habitabunt?
Enoch and Elijah. — Nor does this other opinion of St Hippolytus wander beyond the bounds of conjecture; namely, that the prophets Enoch and Elijah during half of the seventieth week will fight with the Antichrist, and will spend in preaching "two thousand, two hundred and sixty days;" which is equally uncertain. Enoch and Elijah will certainly appear in the age of the Antichrist, exhorting men to repentance, just as our author teaches in the same place. Yet at what precise time will they appear? For how many days will they inhabit
Editors' notes and page, col. 375
Footnotes
(21, scripture) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images) Apoc. XIII, 11.
Revelation 13:11.
(printed under page 198)
(22) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
S. Hippolyt. lib. De Ant., num. 48.
St Hippolytus, the book On Antichrist, no. 48.
(printed under page 198)
(23) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, ibid.
The same, in the same place.
(printed under page 198)
(24) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, ibid., num. 19.
The same, in the same place, no. 19.
(printed under page 198)
(25) ‹anchor: cum ait› · call in col 375
Idem, ibid., num. 43 et seqq. Captatio hæc certi temporis Antichristi, ut et Christi ad judicium venturi, omnino cavenda, quod nosse hæc mortales Providentia noluerit. Videndus S. Chrysostomus, homil. 2 adv. Judæos, et Hieronymus in Danielis IX, aliique ibidem.
The same, in the same place, no. 43 ff. This hunting after a fixed time for Antichrist, as also for Christ's coming to judgement, is wholly to be avoided, since Providence has not willed that mortals should know these things. See St Chrysostom, homily 2 against the Jews, and Jerome on Daniel 9, and others there.
(printed under page 198)
(26) ‹anchor: Hippolyti opinio› · call in col 375
S. Hippolyt., lib. De Antichristo, num. 43.
St Hippolytus, the book On Antichrist, no. 43.
(printed under page 198)
(27) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Idem, ibid., num. 6 et seqq.
The same, in the same place, no. 6 ff.
(printed under page 198)
Page
- running head: 375 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A Scripturarum, et praecipue; B futilis est.; C ficium abolitum, abominatio; D (22) S. Hippolyt.
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Scripturarum, et praecipue (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: ha-[bitabunt]
Vanae ac inutiles quaestiones sunt istae, quarum certam solutionem latere nos voluit Spiritus sanctus, sicuti et determinatum tempus quo omnia consummabuntur; quod tempus nihilominus ad exitum sexti millenarii ab eodem S. Hippolyto praefigitur. Ex quibus sane peculiaribus divi Hippolyti opinionibus probe conjicimus, eum in exponendo litterali Scripturarum sensu parum admodum excelluisse.
the earth? Vain and useless are those questions, the certain solution of which the Holy Spirit willed to be hidden from us, just as also the determined time at which all things will be consummated; which time nevertheless is fixed by the same St Hippolytus at the close of the sixth millennium. From which peculiar opinions of St Hippolytus indeed we rightly conjecture that in expounding the literal sense of the Scriptures he excelled very little.
Characteres Antichristi. — Felicioribus ventis mare istud enavigat, cum docet seductorem hunc, ut facilius homines decipiat, venturum esse quibusdam notis ac signis distinctum, quae in sacris litteris Jesu Christo tribuuntur; seductor enim, ut ait sanctus Hippolytus, per omnia similis videri vult Filio Dei. « Leo quidem Christus, ex sacris Scripturis; et ex iisdem Scripturis leo Antichristus. Rex Christus; ac rex Antichristus. Exhibitus est Salvator ut agnus; ipse quoque pariter ut agnus apparebit. Misit Dominus apostolos in omnes gentes; mittet et ipse perinde pseudoapostolos. Congregavit Salvator oves, quae dispersae erant; ipse quoque pariter populum congregabit, qui dispersus est. Dedit Dominus fidelibus suis signaculum; ipse quoque similiter dabit. Apparuit Salvator hominis habitu; ipse quoque in hominis habitu veniet. Excitavit Salvator, ac sanctam domum suam ut templum fecit; ipse itidem templum lapidibus constructum Hierosolymis excitabit. » Hi sunt, juxta S. Hippolytum, characteres qui in speciem Jesu Christo et Antichristo communes erunt; quibus aliud adjungit, non aeque certum; quod scilicet, cum Salvator venerit in circumcisione in mundum, veniet et ille similiter.
Characters of the Antichrist. — With happier winds he sails through that sea, when he teaches that this seducer, in order that he may more easily deceive men, will come distinguished by certain marks and signs which in sacred letters are attributed to Jesus Christ; for the seducer, as St Hippolytus says, wishes to appear like the Son of God in all things. "Christ indeed is a lion, from the sacred Scriptures; and from the same Scriptures the Antichrist is a lion. Christ is a king; and the Antichrist is a king. The Saviour was exhibited as a lamb; he also will likewise appear as a lamb. The Lord sent apostles into all nations; he also will in like manner send false apostles. The Saviour gathered together the sheep which were scattered; he also will likewise gather together the people that is scattered. The Lord gave a seal to His faithful; he also will similarly give one. The Saviour appeared in the habit of a man; he also will come in the habit of a man. The Saviour raised up and made His holy house as a temple; he likewise will raise up a temple built of stones in Jerusalem." These are, according to St Hippolytus, the characters which in appearance will be common to Jesus Christ and the Antichrist; to which he adds another, not equally certain; namely, that since the Saviour came in circumcision into the world, he also will come similarly.
Hoc autem pacto a vero Christo secerni poterit seductor ille: erit quippe politicus tyrannus, qui omnium tormentorum genere animadvertet in eos, qui illius doctrinam sectari abnuent; insuper falsis promissionibus allicere tentabit; per summam arrogantiam divinos honores exquiret: quem tandem Dominus humiliabit, et poenam infliget nimiae illius superbiae debitam. Jesus Christus eum exterminabit spiritu oris sui; et deinceps veniet judicare omnes homines. Haec sunt notabiliora, quae in divo Hippolyto quoad dogma deprehendere potui.
Now in this manner that seducer will be able to be distinguished from the true Christ: for he will be a political tyrant, who with every kind of torments will punish those who refuse to follow his doctrine; besides, he will attempt to allure by false promises; through supreme arrogance he will demand divine honours: whom at length the Lord will humble, and will inflict the punishment due to his excessive pride. Jesus Christ will destroy him with the breath of His mouth (2 Thess. 2:8); and thereafter He will come to judge all men. These are the more notable things which I have been able to find in St Hippolytus as regards dogma.
Editors' notes and page, col. 376
Footnotes
(28) ‹anchor: adjungit› · call in col 376
Idem, ibid., num. 6.
The same, in the same place, no. 6.
(printed under page 198)
(29) ‹anchor: omnium tormentorum› · call in col 376
Idem, l. c., num. 25.
The same, in the place cited, no. 25.
(printed under page 198)
(30) ‹anchor: honores exquiret› · call in col 376
Idem, l. c., num. 52 et seqq.
The same, in the place cited, no. 52 ff.
(printed under page 198)
(31) ‹anchor: oris sui› · call in col 376
Idem, l. c., num. 63 et II Thessal. II, 1.
The same, in the place cited, no. 63, and 2 Thessalonians 2:1 [as printed].
(printed under page 198)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 376
- marginal letters: A bitabunt? Vanae ac; B Filio Dei. « Leo; C adjungit (28), non aeque; D stomus, homil. 2
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: bitabunt? Vanae ac (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [ha]bitabunt
CAPUT II.
CHAPTER II.
OBSERVATIONES MORALES ET DISCIPLINARES.
MORAL AND DISCIPLINARY OBSERVATIONS.
ARTICULUS I.
ARTICLE I.
PUNCTA MORALIA QUAEDAM.
CERTAIN MORAL POINTS.
Caute ac cum metu veritates religionis tradendae sunt. — Sanctus noster episcopus initio sui tractatus De Antichristo lectionem praebet iis summe necessariam, quibus Deus indolem ac dotem caeteros docendi largitus est. In eo posita autem est haec lectio, quod scilicet religionis veritates facile non tradant iis, qui ad earumdem abusum proni sunt ac dispositi, sed piis solummodo hominibus, qui in timore Dei vivunt, in sanctitate et justitia. Illi ipsi, qui docent, docere debent cum metu, nec coelestia eloqui debent, nisi charitas urgeat: hinc ipse gentium Apostolus cum metu et caute de mysteriis fidei loquebatur; quia cum tunc temporis nec omnes homines crederent, nec toti terrarum orbi fides illucesceret, justa formidinis causa illi non deerat, fore ut haec mysteria indignis et ad contemptum summe dispositis innotescerent; ideoque Timotheo discipulo suo etiam atque etiam commendat, ut non tradat veritates a se jam acceptas, nisi piis ac religiosis viris, qui alios possint easdem veritates docere. « Cum igitur beatus Apostolus, subjungit S. Hippolytus, haec caute ac cum metu traderet, .... videns scilicet spiritu, non esse omnium fidem; quanto res nobis majoris periculi fiet, si temere nullaque ratione profanis hominibus atque indignis tradiderimus divina eloquia! » Hanc summe necessariam moralis partem confirmat doctrina et praxis summorum virorum omnium, qui in Ecclesia floruerunt. Observandum praeterea, quod ex laudatis S. Hippolyti verbis invictum « pro disciplina arcani » primis Ecclesiae saeculis sancte custodita, argumentum deducatur.
The truths of religion must be handed down cautiously and with fear. — Our holy bishop at the beginning of his treatise On the Antichrist furnishes a lesson supremely necessary to those upon whom God has bestowed the native talent and gift of teaching others. Now this lesson consists in this, namely, that they should not easily hand down the truths of religion to those who are prone and disposed to the abuse of the same, but only to pious men, who live in the fear of God, in holiness and righteousness. Those very men who teach ought to teach with fear, nor ought they to utter heavenly things unless charity urges: hence the Apostle of the nations himself spoke with fear and cautiously concerning the mysteries of the faith; because, since at that time neither did all men believe, nor did the faith shine upon the whole world, a just cause of dread was not wanting to him, lest these mysteries should become known to the unworthy and to those supremely disposed to contempt; and therefore to his disciple Timothy he commends again and again that he should not hand down the truths already received from him, save to pious and religious men, who may be able to teach others the same truths. "Since therefore the blessed Apostle," subjoins St Hippolytus, "handed down these things cautiously and with fear, .... seeing namely in spirit that faith does not belong to all; how much more dangerous a matter will it become for us, if rashly and without any reason we hand down the divine utterances to profane and unworthy men!" This supremely necessary part of morals the doctrine and practice of all the greatest men who have flourished in the Church confirms. It is to be observed besides, that from the cited words of St Hippolytus an invincible argument is deduced "for the discipline of the secret," sacredly guarded in the first ages of the Church.
Quo pacto oportet legere ac intelligere divinas Scripturas. — Qui in Scripturarum sacrarum lectione operam locant suam, duo prae oculis habere debent. 1° Ex sacris his libris modum cognoscendi Deum, eidemque famulandi eruere debent, cum ex his fontibus solummodo haec hauriri possint; 2° in id summopere incumbere debent, ut verum earumdem Scripturarum sensum percipiant, et abhorrere ab omni interpretatione ad arbitrium conficta, vel quae peculiari nostro spiritui, nostrisque passionibus sit conformis, uno verbo, nullam Scripturis vim inferre debent: « Non secundum propriam voluntatem, neque secundum proprium sensum, neque vim inferentes in ea, quae ab eo data sunt; sed quomodo ipse (Deus) per sanctas Scripturas docere voluit, sic intelligamus. » Quae quidem verba
In what manner one must read and understand the divine Scriptures. — Those who employ their labour in the reading of the sacred Scriptures ought to keep two things before their eyes. First, from these sacred books they ought to elicit the manner of knowing God and of serving the same, since from these fountains alone can these things be drawn; secondly, they ought to apply themselves with all their might to this, that they may perceive the true sense of the same Scriptures, and shrink from every interpretation devised at will, or which is conformable to our own peculiar spirit and our passions; in a word, they ought to do no violence to the Scriptures: "Not according to our own will, nor according to our own sense, nor doing violence to the things which have been given by Him; but in what manner He Himself (God) willed to teach through the holy Scriptures, so let us understand." Which words indeed
Editors' notes and page, col. 377
Footnotes
(32) ‹anchor: haec lectio› · call in col 377
S. Hippolyt., lib. De Antichr., num. 1.
St Hippolytus, the book On Antichrist, no. 1.
(printed under page 199)
(33) ‹anchor: sic intelligamus› · call in col 377
Idem, adv. Noet., num. 9.
The same, Against Noetus, no. 9.
(printed under page 199)
(34) ‹anchor: idem S. Hippolytus› · call in col 378
Idem, ibid., num. 16.
The same, in the same place, no. 16.
(printed under page 199)
Page
- running head: 377 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A ARTICULUS I.; B nec omnes homines; C sia floruerunt. Observandum; D bus sit conformis,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; full-width headings at top (CAPUT II... / OBSERVATIONES MORALES ET...) cut off at right edge, not set; editors' matter: ARTICULUS I. (Lumper's dissertation)
attendere deberent haeretici nostri hujus saeculi, nec non multi qui inter Catholicos male vivunt.
the heretics of this our age ought to heed, as well as many who live ill among Catholics.
Cum de mysteriis agitur, curiosius non inquirendum. — Nec minoris est utilitatis id quod docet alio loco idem S. Hippolytus: scilicet, cum de mysteriis agitur, curiosius non inquirendum. Exemplum proferamus ab eodem excerptum, quod est de generatione Verbi: « Sed dicet mihi aliquis (verba sunt S. Hippolyti): Quomodo Verbum genitum est? Explicationem hujus mysterii quomodo petis tu, qui modum generationis humanae non potes perfecte efferre? Non satis est tibi scire quod Deus mundum condidit, nisi audeas inquirere quomodo condidit? Non sufficit tibi cognoscere, quod Filius Dei tibi apparuit ad salutem, si tamen id credis; sed insuper quomodo genitus est secundum spiritum curiose indagas? Atqui generationem ejus secundum carnem enarrare non pluribus quam duobus (Matthaeo et Lucae) concreditum est: et tu audes generationem secundum spiritum scrutari? « Quam generationem apud se Pater servat, revelaturus tunc sanctis, qui ut faciem ejus videant digni erunt. » Satis habe, quod a Christo dictum est: Quod natum est ex spiritu, spiritus est, .... Sufficiant haec testimonia fidelibus veritatis studiosis; infideles enim nulli credunt. »
When it is a question of mysteries, one must not inquire too curiously. — Of no less utility is that which the same St Hippolytus teaches in another place: namely, that when it is a question of mysteries, one must not inquire too curiously. Let us bring forward an example excerpted from the same, which is concerning the generation of the Word: "But someone will say to me (the words are those of St Hippolytus): How was the Word begotten? How do you ask for the explanation of this mystery, you who cannot perfectly set forth the mode of human generation? Is it not enough for you to know that God created the world, unless you dare to inquire how He created it? Does it not suffice for you to know that the Son of God appeared to you for salvation, if indeed you believe this; but besides you curiously search into how He was begotten according to the spirit? And yet to relate His generation according to the flesh was entrusted to no more than two (Matthew and Luke): and do you dare to scrutinize His generation according to the spirit? 'Which generation the Father keeps with Himself, being about to reveal it then to the saints who shall be worthy to see His face.' Count it enough what was said by Christ: That which is born of the spirit is spirit (John 3:6), .... Let these testimonies suffice for the faithful who are zealous for the truth; for unbelievers believe no one."
Charitas Christiana. Figurae Ecclesiae. — Charitas Jesu Christi est anima Ecclesiae, et est veluti vinculum quo fideles uniuntur. Per hanc charitatem, sicuti et per fidem, Ecclesia recipit Baptismum: « Ecclesia per fidem .... et charitatem in Deum, .... recipit lavacrum regenerationis. » Qui post susceptum Baptismum transgrediuntur Dei mandata, vel religioni Christianae nuntium mittunt, aeternam propriae animae mortem inferunt. Peccatum mors est animae, inquit sanctus hic Pater, praesertim autem moechia; quia enim anima Christo copulata discessione a fide in perennem traditur mortem, ad ejus rei fidem violato quoque corporalium nuptiarum foedere perversisque thalamis lex poenam mortis indixit. In sancto Hippolyto variae quoad Ecclesiam comparationes ac similitudines occurrunt; in primis comparat eam navi fluctibus pelagi jactatae, quae tamen naufragio haud perit, quia a Christo gubernatur. En elegantem hujus comparationis descriptionem ab Hippolyto adornatam: « Alae navium sunt Ecclesiae, mare mundus, in quo Ecclesia fluctibus jactatur, nec tamen naufragio perit, quippe cum solertem gubernatorem Christum secum habeat; fert vero etiam in medio
Christian charity. Figures of the Church. — The charity of Jesus Christ is the soul of the Church, and is as it were the bond whereby the faithful are united. Through this charity, just as also through faith, the Church receives Baptism: "The Church through faith .... and charity towards God, .... receives the laver of regeneration." Those who after receiving Baptism transgress the commandments of God, or send a bill of divorce to the Christian religion, bring eternal death upon their own soul. Sin is the death of the soul, says this holy Father, and especially adultery; for because the soul joined to Christ by departing from the faith is delivered over to perpetual death, in confirmation of that matter, when the covenant of bodily nuptials also is violated and the marriage-bed perverted, the law appointed the punishment of death. In St Hippolytus various comparisons and similitudes as regards the Church occur; in the first place he compares her to a ship tossed by the waves of the sea, which nevertheless by no means perishes by shipwreck, because she is steered by Christ. Behold an elegant description of this comparison adorned by Hippolytus: "The wings of ships are the Churches, the sea is the world, in which the Church is tossed by the waves, and yet does not perish by shipwreck, inasmuch as she has with her the skilful pilot Christ; and she carries also in the midst
Editors' notes and page, col. 378
Footnotes
(22, scripture) ‹anchor: spiritus est› · call in col 378 Joan. III, 6.
John 3:6.
(printed under page 199)
(35) ‹anchor: lavacrum regenerationis› · call in col 378
Idem, lib. De Antichristo, num. 59.
The same, the book On Antichrist, no. 59.
(printed under page 199)
(36) ‹anchor: hic Pater› · call in col 378
S. Hippolyt., tractat. in Susannam, apud Fabric., tom. I Opp., pag. 276, et apud Galland., t. II, colum. 445.
St Hippolytus, the treatise On Susanna, in Fabricius, Works vol. I, p. 276, and in Gallandi, vol. II, col. 445.
(printed under page 199)
(37) ‹anchor: Hippolyto adornatam› · call in col 378
S. Hippolyt., lib. De Antichr., cap. 59.
St Hippolytus, the book On Antichrist, ch. 59.
(printed under page 199)
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 378
- marginal letters: A attendere deberent haeretici; B credis; sed insuper; C « Ecclesia per fidem; D quia a Christo
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; full-width headings at top (...CAPUT II. / ...MORALES ET DISCIPLINARES.) cut off at left edge, not set; editors' matter: attendere deberent haeretici (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
erectum adversus mortem tropaeum, quae videlicet crucem Domini secum portet. Est enim ejus prora Oriens, puppis vero Occidens, cavitas Meridies; clavi duo Testamenta; circum extenti funes Christi charitas, quae Ecclesiam astringit; linum, quod secum fert, lavacrum est regenerationis; quae fideles renovat. Venti loco adest Spiritus ille e coelis, quo fideles consignantur Deo; habet pariter illa comites et ferreas anchoras, sancta nimirum Christi mandata, quae ferri robur ipsum praeferant; quin et nautas a dextris atque sinistris sanctorum angelorum more assistentes, quorum ope munitur Ecclesia. In ea scala, quae in altum ad antennam subvehit, imago est salutaris Christi passionis, fideles trahens, ut in coelos ascendant. Signa super antennam in altum sublata, prophetarum, martyrum et apostolorum in Christi regno quiescentium stipatus ordo. » Colligitur ex his ultimis verbis, quemadmodum bene observat cl. Ceillierius, sanctum nostrum episcopum communiter ab antiquis receptam sententiam secutum fuisse, quod nimirum prophetae, apostoli et martyres felicitatem aeternam in coelis adepti fuerint.
the trophy erected against death, inasmuch as she carries with her the cross of the Lord. For her prow is the East, her stern the West, her hold the South; her rudders the two Testaments; the ropes stretched around, the charity of Christ, which binds the Church together; the net which she carries with her is the laver of regeneration, which renews the faithful. In the place of the wind there is present that Spirit from the heavens, whereby the faithful are sealed unto God; she has likewise companions and iron anchors, namely the holy commandments of Christ, which display the very strength of iron; nay more, sailors standing by on the right hand and on the left after the manner of the holy angels, by whose help the Church is fortified. In that ladder which leads up on high to the sail-yard is the image of the saving passion of Christ, drawing the faithful that they may ascend into the heavens. The standards raised on high above the sail-yard are the close-serried rank of prophets, martyrs, and apostles resting in the kingdom of Christ." It is gathered from these last words, just as the illustrious Ceillier well observes, that our holy bishop followed the opinion commonly received by the ancients, namely that the prophets, apostles, and martyrs have obtained eternal felicity in the heavens.
Ecclesia mulier sole amicta. — Paulo infra aliam de Ecclesia similitudinem affert, dum illa Apocalypseos verba cap. XII, 1-6: Et vidi signum magnum et mirabile, mulierem amictam sole, etc., in quae ita commentatur: « Mulierem amictam sole clarissime Ecclesiam significavit (Joannes), Paterno indutam Verbo, quod sole micantius splendet. Dicendo vero lunam sub pedibus ejus, coelesti charitate lunae in morem ornatam ostendit. Quod autem ait in capite ejus corona stellarum duodecim, duodecim apostolos designat, per quos fundata est Ecclesia. Et habens in utero clamabat parturiens, et cruciabatur, ut pareret; quia non cessat Ecclesia ex corde Verbum gignere, quod in mundo ab infidelibus persecutionem patitur. Et peperit, inquit, filium masculum, qui erat recturus omnes gentes; nimirum Ecclesia, dum Christum Dei, masculam ac perfectam prolem, qui Deus et homo praedicatur, semper parit, docet omnes gentes. Porro dicendo, raptus est filius ejus ad Deum, et ad thronum ejus; coelestem regem, non terrenum esse significat, qui ex illa semper nascitur. » Idem S. Pater in tractatu perbrevi De Susanna multis etiam ostendit, Susannam figuram gessisse Ecclesiae. In opere vero De traditione apostolorum docet, numero 19, apud Gallandium tomo II Bibliothecae Patrum, columna 507, quodnam
The Church a woman clothed with the sun. — A little below he brings forward another similitude concerning the Church, while upon those words of the Apocalypse, chapter 12:1-6: And I saw a great and wonderful sign, a woman clothed with the sun, etc., he comments thus: "By the woman clothed with the sun (John) most clearly signified the Church, clothed with the Paternal Word, Who shines more brightly than the sun. And by saying the moon under her feet, he shows her adorned with heavenly charity after the manner of the moon. And as to his saying upon her head a crown of twelve stars, he designates the twelve apostles, through whom the Church was founded. And being with child she cried out travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered; because the Church ceases not to beget out of her heart the Word, Which in the world suffers persecution from unbelievers. And she brought forth, he says, a man child, who was to rule all nations; namely, the Church, while she ever brings forth Christ, the masculine and perfect offspring of God, Who is preached as God and man, teaches all nations. Moreover by saying, her son was caught up unto God, and to His throne, he signifies that He Who is ever born from her is a heavenly King, not an earthly one." The same holy Father in the very brief treatise On Susanna also shows by many arguments that Susanna bore the figure of the Church. And in the work On the Tradition of the Apostles he teaches, at number 19, in Galland, volume 2 of the Bibliotheca Patrum, column 507, what
Editors' notes and page, col. 379
Footnotes
(23, scripture) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images) Dan. XIII, 15.
Daniel 13:15.
(printed under page 200)
(38) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Quod sic lavacro regenerationis comparet Hippolytus, nihil aliud commodius lino occurrit, quo sic capiuntur pisces, et cujus metaphora, prædicatio evangelica Proclo, Chrysostomo, etc., declaratur. Ejus itaque navis, quæ Ecclesia est, linum capiendis pisciculis, et ut jam Christi ac Ecclesiæ membra sint extra mundi profani salsedinem, lavacrum est regenerationis, quo sic Christo incorporamur.
That Hippolytus thus compares it to the washing of regeneration: nothing comes to mind more fitting than the net, by which fish are caught in this way, and by whose metaphor the preaching of the Gospel is expressed in Proclus, Chrysostom and others. So the net of his ship, which is the Church, for catching the little fish, and so that they may now be members of Christ and of the Church outside the brine of the profane world, is the washing of regeneration, by which we are thus incorporated into Christ.
(printed under page 200)
(39) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Remi Ceillier, Hist. génér. des auteurs, tom. II, pag. 371.
Remi Ceillier, Histoire générale des auteurs [sacrés et ecclésiastiques], vol. II, p. 371.
(printed under page 200)
(40) ‹anchor: commentatur› · call in col 379
S. Hippolyt., lib. De Antichr., num. 50.
St Hippolytus, the book On Antichrist, no. 50.
(printed under page 200)
(41) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Id., tract. De Susanna, apud Galland., tom. II, colum. 443 et 444; et apud Fabric., tom. I, pag. 275.
The same, the treatise On Susanna, in Gallandi, vol. II, cols. 443 and 444; and in Fabricius, vol. I, p. 275.
(printed under page 200)
Page
- running head: 379 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A erectum adversus mortem; B nam in altum sublata,; C indutam Verbo, quod; D semper nascitur. » Idem
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: erectum adversus mortem (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
sit Ecclesiae magisterium: « Est enim Ecclesia ordinis, non confusionis magistra. » Notent sibi haec verba auro cedroque digna Ecclesiae antistites, theologiaeque doctores.
the magisterium of the Church is: "For the Church is the mistress of order, not of confusion." Let the prelates of the Church and the doctors of theology mark for themselves these words worthy of gold and cedar-oil.
ARTICULUS II.
ARTICLE II.
OBSERVATIONES DISCIPLINARES.
DISCIPLINARY OBSERVATIONS.
Tempus ad Baptismum recipiendum praefinitum. — Quoad disciplinam, haec observanda veniunt apud S. Hippolytum: primo, solemnitatem Paschatis fuisse tempus praefinitum ad ministrandum et recipiendum Baptismum. Ait enim sanctus episcopus in illud: Dum observarent diem aptum, commentans: « Quem porro, nisi diem Paschae, per quem lavacrum in pomario aestuantibus paratur? »
The time appointed for receiving Baptism. — As regards discipline, these things come to be observed in St Hippolytus: first, that the solemnity of Easter was the time appointed for administering and receiving Baptism. For the holy bishop says, commenting upon that text: While they watched for a fitting day (Dan. 13:15): "What day, moreover, save the day of Easter, through which the laver in the orchard is prepared for those who are burning with heat?"
Dispositiones ad Baptismum. — Dispositiones autem ibidem vetustus hic Pater commemorat, dum ita prosequitur: « Susanna lavans munda Deo sponsa sistitur cum duabus solis puellis. Quando enim Ecclesia ex more cupit lavacrum suscipere, duas necessario ancillas comites habet; etenim Ecclesia per fidem in Christum, et per charitatem in Deum confessa recipit lavacrum. » Hinc Baptismi comites fides et charitas.
Dispositions for Baptism. — Moreover, in the same place this ancient Father recounts the dispositions, while he continues thus: "Susanna washing is presented as a pure bride to God with two maidens alone. For when the Church according to custom desires to receive the laver, she necessarily has two handmaids as companions; for the Church, having made confession through faith in Christ and through charity towards God, receives the laver." Hence the companions of Baptism are faith and charity.
Oleum, atque unctio in Baptismo. — Eodem in loco S. Hippolytus inter ritus in Baptismo conferendo adhiberi solitos recenset oleum atque unctionem. Scribit enim in versum 17 Danielis: Dixitque puellis: Afferte mihi oleum: « Proinde fides et charitas, oleum et smegmata lavantibus parant. Quaenam vero smegmata, nisi Verbi mandata? Quodnam autem oleum, nisi virtus Spiritus sancti? quibus post lavacrum tanquam unguento fideles perunguntur. Cuncta haec per beatam Susannam nostri causa figurabantur: ne modo scilicet, qui Deo credimus, ea quae inpraesentiarum in Ecclesia fiunt, tanquam nova ac peregrina existimemus. »
Oil and unction in Baptism. — In the same place St Hippolytus among the rites accustomed to be employed in conferring Baptism reckons oil and unction. For he writes upon verse 17 of Daniel: And she said to the maidens: Bring me oil: "Accordingly faith and charity prepare oil and unguents for those who wash. Now what are the unguents, save the commandments of the Word? And what is the oil, save the power of the Holy Spirit? With which after the laver, as with ointment, the faithful are anointed. All these things were figured through blessed Susanna for our sake: namely, lest now we who believe in God should regard the things which at the present day are done in the Church as new and strange."
Tempus celebrandi solemnitatem paschalem. — Secundo tradit hic vetustus Ecclesiae Pater, Paschatis solemnitatem celebrari debuisse Dominica post decimam quartam lunam Martii, nisi decima quarta luna incideret in diem Sabbati; quo sane in casu juxta eumdem celebrari non debebat festus Paschatis dies Dominica sequenti, sed transferri in aliam subsequentem Dominicam, ne festus hic dies celebraretur eodem die, quo Dominus noster Jesus Christus mortuus est.
Time of celebrating the paschal solemnity. — Secondly, this ancient Father of the Church hands down that the solemnity of Easter ought to be celebrated on the Sunday after the fourteenth moon of March, unless the fourteenth moon should fall upon the Sabbath day; in which case indeed according to the same the feast day of Easter ought not to be celebrated on the following Sunday, but to be transferred to another subsequent Sunday, lest this feast day should be celebrated on the same day on which our Lord Jesus Christ died.
Tertio docet solvendum esse Quadragesimale jejunium Dominica Paschatis: « Solvere autem oportet jejunium, ubi Dominica inciderit. »
Thirdly, he teaches that the Lenten fast must be ended on Easter Sunday: "Now one must end the fast when Sunday falls."
Editors' notes and page, col. 380
Footnotes
(22, scripture) ‹anchor: diem aptum› · call in col 380 Dan. XIII, 15.
Daniel 13:15.
(printed under page 200)
(41) ‹anchor: commentans› · call in col 380
Id., tract. De Susanna, apud Galland., tom. II, colum. 443 et 444; et apud Fabric., tom. I, pag. 275.
The same, treatise On Susanna, in Gallandi, vol. II, cols 443 and 444; and in Fabricius, vol. I, p. 275.
(printed under page 200)
(42) ‹anchor: mortuus est› · call in col 380
Id., De cyclo pasch.
The same, On the Paschal Cycle.
(printed under page 200)
(43) ‹anchor: Dominica inciderit› · call in col 380
Idem, ibid.
The same, in the same place.
(printed under page 200)
Page
- running head: SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 380
- marginal letters: A sit Ecclesiae magisterium:; B tem ibidem vetustus; C Quaenam vero smegmata,; D braretur eodem die,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: sit Ecclesiae magisterium, ARTICULUS II. (Lumper's dissertation)
CAPUT III.
CHAPTER III.
JUDICIUM DE S. HIPPOLYTI INGENIO, ERUDITIONE AC STYLO, DE EJUSDEM ERRORIBUS. OPERUMQUE EJUSDEM EDITIONIBUS.
JUDGEMENT ON THE GENIUS, ERUDITION AND STYLE OF ST HIPPOLYTUS, ON HIS ERRORS, AND ON THE EDITIONS OF HIS WORKS.
ARTICULUS I.
ARTICLE I.
DE INGENIO, ERUDITIONE AC STYLO S. HIPPOLYTI.
ON THE GENIUS, ERUDITION, AND STYLE OF ST HIPPOLYTUS.
Judicium Maurinorum de ingenio, eruditione, etc., S. Hippolyti. — Eruditi Historiae litterariae Galliae auctores de sancti Hippolyti Portuensis ingenio ac eruditione ita pronuntiant: Cum sanctus Hippolytus tam multa, quemadmodum ostendimus, conscripserit opera, non dubitamus quin vir multa eruditione fuerit. Quid? quod nos necdum in omnium, quae e calamo ejus fluxere, operum notitiam pervenisse, multo autem minus illa omnia et singula adnotasse arbitremur. Hoc saltem constat omnino, quod nullum eruditionis ecclesiasticae tunc temporis fuerit genus, de quo non aliquid scripto reliquerit; adeo ut optimo jure sistendus a nobis hoc loco sanctus Hippolytus esset veluti sacrarum litterarum interpres, canonista, theologus, controversista, historicus, chronologus, orator atque poeta Christianus. Sanctus quoque Hieronymus non dubitat sanctum nostrum eos inter Ecclesiae Patres recensere, « qui in tantum (verba sunt doctoris maximi) philosophorum doctrinis atque sententiis suos resarciunt libros, ut nescias quid in illis primum admirari debeas, eruditionem saeculi, an scientiam Scripturarum. »
Judgement of the Maurists concerning the genius, erudition, etc., of St Hippolytus. — The learned authors of the Literary History of France pronounce thus concerning the genius and erudition of St Hippolytus of Portus: Since St Hippolytus wrote so many works, just as we have shown, we do not doubt that he was a man of great erudition. What of the fact that we think we have not yet arrived at a knowledge of all the works which flowed from his pen, and much less have noted them all and each? This at least is altogether established, that there was no kind of ecclesiastical erudition at that time concerning which he did not leave something in writing; so that with the best right St Hippolytus ought to be presented by us in this place as an interpreter of sacred letters, a canonist, a theologian, a controversialist, a historian, a chronologist, a Christian orator and poet. St Jerome also does not hesitate to reckon our saint among those Fathers of the Church "who to such a degree (the words are those of the greatest doctor) stuff their books with the doctrines and maxims of the philosophers, that you know not what you ought first to admire in them, secular erudition, or knowledge of the Scriptures."
Maximam esse inter doctrinam sancti Hippolyti nostri et illam divi Irenaei sui magistri consensionem ex iis, quae supra de residuis illius operibus disputavimus, facile deprehendet studiosus lector. Causa vero hujus consensionis nequaquam tamen in illius discipulatum unice refundenda est; sed potissimum etiam hoc illius summae sollicitudini ascribendum, quam adhibebat, ne vel minimum quidquam, quod ab antecessoribus suis acceperat, immutaret.
That there is the greatest agreement between the doctrine of our St Hippolytus and that of St Irenaeus his master, the studious reader will easily perceive from the things which we have disputed above concerning his remaining works. Yet the cause of this agreement is by no means to be referred solely to his discipleship; but chiefly also this must be ascribed to that supreme solicitude of his which he employed lest he should alter even the least thing which he had received from his predecessors.
Quemadmodum autem S. Irenaeus divinitatem Verbi aeterni tam valide ac invicte confirmavit, ut pauci omnino sancti Patres concilio Nicaeno posteriores de hoc religionis mysterio dignius locuti fuerint; sic fere omnia, quae superant, sancti Hippolyti scripta textibus conserta sunt, quibus haec doctrina clarissime stabilitur. Hinc judicare licet
Moreover, just as St Irenaeus confirmed the divinity of the eternal Word so strongly and invincibly that very few holy Fathers subsequent to the Council of Nicaea have spoken more worthily concerning this mystery of religion; so almost all the writings of St Hippolytus which remain are interwoven with texts whereby this doctrine is most clearly established. Hence one may judge
Editors' notes and page, col. 381
Footnotes
(44) ‹anchor: ita pronuntiant› · call in col 381
Histoire littéraire de la France, tom. I, pag. 397 et suiv.
Histoire littéraire de la France, vol. I, p. 397 ff.
(printed under page 201)
(45) ‹anchor: Hieronymus› · call in col 381
S. Hieronym., epist. ad Magnum orator., num. 70, p. 430 edit. noviss. Venet., in-4.
St Jerome, letter to Magnus the orator, no. 70, p. 430 of the latest Venice edition, in quarto.
(printed under page 201)
(46) ‹anchor: immutaret› · call in col 381
Apud Fabric., Opp. Hippolyt. tom. I, pag. 5, num. 2.
In Fabricius, Works of Hippolytus vol. I, p. 5, no. 2.
(printed under page 201)
(47) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Sand., Hist. eccles., lib. I, pag. 98.
Sandius, Historia ecclesiastica, book I, p. 98.
(printed under page 201)
(48) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Circa annum tamen ætatis, quo passus est Christus, maluit S. Hippolytus ab Irenæo magistro suo discedere, quam a communi sententia. Nam scripserat Irenæus passum esse Christum quadragenario majorem lib. II adv. hæres., cap. 22. Econtra Hippolytus in interpretatione in Danielem, num. 4, ait : « Passus vero est anno tricesimo tertio. »
As to the year of his age in which Christ suffered, however, St Hippolytus preferred to depart from his master Irenaeus rather than from the common opinion. For Irenaeus had written that Christ suffered when over forty, Against Heresies book II, ch. 22. Hippolytus, on the contrary, says in the interpretation of Daniel, no. 4: "He suffered in his thirty-third year."
(printed under page 201)
Page
- running head: 381 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A ARTICULUS I.; B ctus Hippolytus esset; C in illius discipulatum; D (45) S. Hieronym.,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; full-width headings at top (CAPUT II... / JUDICIUM DE S. HIPPOLYTI INGENIO, ERU... / ERRORIBUS, OPERUMQUE EJU...) cut off at right edge, not set; editors' matter: ARTICULUS I. (Lumper's dissertation)
de magnitudine injuriae, quam sancto nostro intulit Sandius, dum eumdem accusat, quasi oppositam sententiam tenuisset. Sed ab hac falsa criminatione cl. Bullus eumdem tam plene ac cumulate vindicavit, ut nulla supersit amplius hac in re difficultas.
of the greatness of the injury which Sandius inflicted upon our saint, while he accuses the same as though he had held the opposite opinion. But from this false accusation the illustrious Bull has vindicated the same so fully and abundantly that no difficulty any longer remains in this matter.
Insuper sanctus Hippolytus sui magistri secutus est doctrinam in stabilienda animarum immortalitate ac corporum resurrectione. Duae hae veritates religionis Christianae sua aetate praeprimis acerrime impugnatae fuerunt. Opinionem de metempsychosi etiam evertit, atque auctoritatem Apocalypsis, velut genuini Joannis evangelistae scripti, defendit. Quin eo etiam processit, ut sententiam quoque illam, quae sancto Irenaeo quoad Epistolam ad Hebraeos tribuitur, quod nimirum non sit divi Pauli, amplexatus fuerit; quanquam eamdem ut Scripturam sacram susceperit. Ad haec verosimile est Portuensem episcopum saltem ex parte opinioni divi Irenaei accessisse de statu animarum post mortem, et de duratione mundi, quam uterque exactis sex annorum millibus statuebant.
Besides, St Hippolytus followed the doctrine of his master in establishing the immortality of souls and the resurrection of bodies. These two truths of the Christian religion were in his age above all most fiercely attacked. He also overthrew the opinion concerning metempsychosis, and defended the authority of the Apocalypse as a genuine writing of John the Evangelist. Nay, he even went so far as to embrace also that opinion which is attributed to St Irenaeus as regards the Epistle to the Hebrews, namely that it is not St Paul's; although he received the same as sacred Scripture. In addition to these things, it is probable that the bishop of Portus acceded at least in part to the opinion of St Irenaeus concerning the state of souls after death, and concerning the duration of the world, which both fixed at the completion of six thousand years.
At magistrum suum in studio interpretandae sacrae Scripturae indefesso antecelluit, indeque planum fecit, quod sacrorum librorum intelligentiam velut rem summi momenti ad religionem sartam tectamque servandam consideravit. Haec gloria sancto Hippolyto nostro debetur, quod primas inter sanctos Patres, qui in plures sacrae Scripturae libros commentati fuerint, tenuerit partes; quodque ipse incitamento ac exemplo fuerit magno Origeni ad suscipiendum laborem Ecclesiae tam proficuum. Fatendum etiam quod, Origene excepto, nullus SS. Patrum plus operae dederit sensui allegorico quam sanctus Hippolytus. Hujus rei sane convincimur ex reliquiis ejusdem commentariorum in sacras litteras. Photius quoque observat eumdem protulisse sententias ad veritatis limam minus exactas; sed haec Photius intelligit de ea diligentia et cura, quae primum longo tempore post aetatem, qua sanctus noster scripserat, innotuit atque observata fuit.
But he excelled his master in his unwearying zeal for interpreting sacred Scripture, and thence made it plain that he considered the understanding of the sacred books as a matter of supreme moment for keeping religion sound and whole. This glory is due to our St Hippolytus, that he held the first place among the holy Fathers who commented upon several books of sacred Scripture; and that he himself was an incentive and example to the great Origen for undertaking a labour so profitable to the Church. It must also be confessed that, with the exception of Origen, none of the holy Fathers devoted more labour to the allegorical sense than St Hippolytus. Of this fact indeed we are convinced from the remains of the same writer's commentaries upon sacred letters. Photius also observes that the same put forward opinions less exact according to the file of truth; but Photius understands these things of that diligence and care which first became known and was observed a long time after the age in which our saint had written.
Editors' notes and page, col. 382
Footnotes
(49) ‹anchor: Photius› · call in col 382
« Lecta est Hippolyti episcopi et martyris interpretatio Danielis, quem etsi ad verbum non explicat, sententiam tamen, ut ita dicam, non prætercurrit. Multa porro veteri more, non ut postea fuere accuratius excussa, persequitur. Quanquam eorum posci rationem æquum non est. Neque enim fas ab iis, qui fundamenta rei alicujus consideranda posuerint, rationem repetere eorum quæ præteriere; sed favere potius conatui ipsi, quantulumcunque in rerum contemplandarum comprehensione processerint. » Phot., cod. CCII.
"I read the interpretation of Daniel by Hippolytus, bishop and martyr; though he does not explain him word for word, he does not, so to speak, skip over the sense. Moreover he treats many things in the old manner, not as they were afterwards more carefully sifted. Yet it is not fair to demand an account of these. For it is not right to require of those who laid the foundations for considering a subject an account of what they passed over; rather one should favour the attempt itself, however little they advanced in grasping the things to be contemplated." Photius, codex 202.
(printed under page 201)
Page
- running head: ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 382
- marginal letters: A de magnitudine injuriae,; B sancto Irenaeo quoad; C commentati fuerint, tenuerit; D interpretatio Danielis, quem
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: notes (47) (call at Sandius) and (48) (call at Bullus) are called in this column; both are set in n381 (printed under col 381, note 48 running on to the top of this column's foot); Latin only, no Greek printed; full-width headings at top (...CAPUT III. / ...GENIO, ERUDITIONE AC STYLO DE EJUSDEM / ...RUMQUE EJUSDEM EDITIONIBUS.) cut off at left edge, not set; editors' matter: de magnitudine injuriae (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
Stylus sancti Hippolyti. — Quod autem sancti Hippolyti dicendi scribendique formam concernit, haec omnes amabilis primorum saeculorum simplicitatis prae se fert characteres. Hac tamen non obstante divus Hieronymus magnam eloquentiae vim sancto nostro ascribit: siquidem eloquentia multum sociabilis est cum simplicitate, quam in ejus scriptis observavimus. Eloquentia enim is omnino valet, quanquam simplici utatur stylo, quisquis apte et apposite ad persuadendum disserit; ille autem persuadere potest, qui argumentis utitur ad commovendos et sedandos affectus maxime accommodatis.
Style of St Hippolytus. — Now as regards St Hippolytus's form of speaking and writing, this displays all the characters of the amiable simplicity of the first ages. Notwithstanding this, however, St Jerome ascribes great force of eloquence to our saint: since eloquence is very compatible with the simplicity which we have observed in his writings. For whoever discourses aptly and appositely for persuading is altogether strong in eloquence, although he uses a simple style; and he is able to persuade who uses arguments most suited for stirring and calming the affections.
Caeterum stylus ejus erat gravis, clarus, nitidus, concisus, inutilibus rebus minime omnino intricatus, atque sacrarum Scripturarum interpretationi maxime congruens. Sed lepores ac venustatem elegantiae Atticae non habet. Regulae quoque ad sermonis elegantiam conducentes interdum ab eo neglectae fuerunt. Haec de indole, ingenio, eruditione ac stylo sancti Hippolyti clarissimi viri e congregatione Sancti Mauri pronuntiarunt.
For the rest, his style was grave, clear, polished, concise, not at all entangled with useless matters, and most suitable for the interpretation of the sacred Scriptures. Yet it does not have the charms and grace of Attic elegance. The rules also that conduce to elegance of speech were sometimes neglected by him. These things concerning the character, genius, erudition, and style of St Hippolytus the most illustrious men of the Congregation of St Maur have pronounced.
Crisis Ceillierii de ingenio, eruditione ac stylo sancti Hippolyti. — Ab horum virorum judicio non abludit crisis doctissimi Ceillierii, quo judice sanctus noster Hippolytus habuit ingenium praeclarum, mite atque a satyra omnino abhorrens. Cohaerenter cogitat, nativo dicendi genere utitur, solide ratiocinatur. Suis in sacram Scripturam expositionibus plus inhaeret spiritui quam litterae. Verum allegoriae illius sunt venustae, et plerumque satis appositae. At vero expositio sensus litteralis non adeo feliciter eidem interdum successit. Genus ejus dicendi clarum, grave ac succinctum; quamvis autem ejus orationi non insint omnes styli Atheniensis venustates, ornatus tamen, nobilis, fluidus et amoenus est illius stylus.
Critical judgement of Ceillier concerning the genius, erudition, and style of St Hippolytus. — From the judgement of these men the critical estimate of the most learned Ceillier does not differ, in whose judgement our St Hippolytus had a noble genius, mild and altogether shrinking from satire. He thinks coherently, uses a natural manner of speaking, and reasons solidly. In his expositions upon sacred Scripture he cleaves more to the spirit than to the letter. Yet his allegories are graceful, and for the most part quite apposite. The exposition of the literal sense, however, did not sometimes succeed so happily for the same. His manner of speaking is clear, grave, and succinct; and although all the graces of the Athenian style are not present in his discourse, nevertheless his style is ornate, noble, fluent, and pleasant.
Caeterum et Maurini nostri, et Remigius Ceillierius in dijudicando ingenio, stylo et eruditione sancti Hippolyti secuti potissimum sunt virum eruditissimum Photium, cujus censuram integram refert Dupinius sua in Bibliotheca, ita loquens: « Hippolyti contra haereticos librum legerat Photius, et en quid de eo sentiat: « Hippolyti, Irenaei auditoris, contra 32 haereses legi libellum; a Dositheanis orditur, et ad Noetum usque et Noetianos pergit. Eas omnes tradit ab Irenaeo confutatas fuisse haereses, et se in eo libello nihil aliud, quam illius Patris ratiocinia et argumenta collegisse. Perspicua est, et gravis ejus oratio, et nihil
For the rest, both our Maurists and Remi Ceillier in judging the genius, style, and erudition of St Hippolytus have chiefly followed the most learned man Photius, whose entire censure Dupin relates in his Bibliotheca, speaking thus: "Photius had read the book of Hippolytus against heretics, and behold what he thinks of it: 'I have read the little book of Hippolytus, the hearer of Irenaeus, against thirty-two heresies; it begins with the Dositheans, and proceeds even to Noetus and the Noetians. He relates that all those heresies were refuted by Irenaeus, and that in that little book he has collected nothing else than the reasonings and arguments of that Father. His discourse is perspicuous and grave, and has nothing
Editors' notes and page, col. 383
Footnotes
(50) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
« Hippolytus vir disertissimus. » Hieron., epist. 28 ad Lucinium. « S. Hippolyti eruditione clarissimi. » Martyrolog. Roman., 22 Augusti.
"Hippolytus, a most eloquent man." Jerome, letter 28 to Lucinius. "Of St Hippolytus, most renowned for learning." Roman Martyrology, 22 August.
(printed under page 202)
(51) ‹anchor: illius stylus› · call in col 383
Remi Ceillier, Hist. gén. des auteurs, t. II, p. 371 et 372.
Remi Ceillier, Histoire générale des auteurs [sacrés et ecclésiastiques], vol. II, pp. 371 and 372.
(printed under page 202)
(52) ‹anchor: in Bibliotheca› · call in col 383
Dupin., Biblioth., t. I, p. 178 et 179 edit. Latin. Coloniæ, 1703.
Dupin, Bibliothèque, vol. I, pp. 178 and 179, Latin edition, Cologne, 1703.
(printed under page 202)
Page
- running head: 383 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A Stylus sancti Hippolyti.; B tus, atque sacrarum; C illius sunt venustae,; D nis orditur, et
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: Stylus sancti Hippolyti (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: ni-[hil]
habet irritum, quamvis ei styli Atheniensis desint lepores. Non vera promit, et in primis Epistolae ad Hebraeos Paulum non esse auctorem. »... Apud eumdem auctorem (Photium) alibi Hippolyti commentarii cujusdam in Danielem fit mentio: « Etiamsi non explicet, inquit Photius, illum prophetam ad litteram, ipsum tamen nullum omittere sensum, priscorum more res explicare, non vero ita accurate, ut exinde sunt expositae; at non ideo censoria dignum esse virgula, quia aequum non est ab iis, qui scientiae fundamenta jaciunt, exigere ut nihil omittant: contra vero eos laude dignos esse, quod primi res aperuerint, et invenerint. » Caeterum errasse Hippolytum cum finis mundi tempus definire voluit, et Antichristi adventum quem Jesus voluit occultum discipulis, vel cum instanter ab eo peterent. « Id, inquit, 500 annis post Christum, fixum voluit, quasi mundus sex mille annis non amplius duraturus esset: id nimis subtile. Ejus scribendi ratio perspicua est, et nitida, et ad commentarium apta, licet a styli Atheniensis legibus et puritate recedat. Exstat etiam ipsius De Christo et Antichristo homilia, in qua, etsi eumdem scribendi modum servaverit, simplicior tamen est, et magis redolet antiquitatem. » His Photii locis innotescit non solum Hippolyti operum, quae legerat, argumentum, sed et illius auctoris tum stylus, tum character. » Hactenus perdoctus Ellies Dupinius.
vain, although the charms of the Athenian style are wanting to it. He puts forward things not true, and in the first place that Paul is not the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews.'... In the same author (Photius) elsewhere mention is made of a certain commentary of Hippolytus on Daniel: 'Even though he does not explain,' says Photius, 'that prophet according to the letter, nevertheless he omits no sense, and explains matters after the manner of the ancients, yet not so accurately as they have been expounded since; but he is not on that account worthy of the censor's rod, because it is not fair to demand from those who lay the foundations of knowledge that they should omit nothing: on the contrary, they are worthy of praise because they were the first to open up and discover matters.' For the rest, he says that Hippolytus erred when he wished to define the time of the end of the world, and the coming of the Antichrist, which Jesus willed to be hidden from the disciples, even when they earnestly asked it of Him. 'That,' he says, 'he would have fixed at five hundred years after Christ, as though the world were to last no longer than six thousand years: that is overly subtle. His manner of writing is perspicuous and polished, and suited for a commentary, although it departs from the laws and purity of the Athenian style. There is extant also his homily On Christ and the Antichrist, in which, although he has preserved the same manner of writing, yet he is simpler, and savours more of antiquity.' By these passages of Photius there becomes known not only the subject-matter of the works of Hippolytus which he had read, but also both the style and the character of that author." Thus far the very learned Ellies Dupin.
ARTICULUS II.
ARTICLE II.
PECULIARES OPINIONES AC ERRORES S. HIPPOLYTI.
PECULIAR OPINIONS AND ERRORS OF ST HIPPOLYTUS.
Num S. Hippolytus sub Antichristo diabolum personatum, et serpentem intellexerit? — Quod spectat ad opiniones peculiares erroresque sancti hujus episcopi, praeter jam dicta superius circa Antichristum, observandum pariter hic venit, quod vetustus hic Pater in libro De Christo et Antichristo, n. 14, commentans in illud Genes. XLIX, 17: Fiat Dan serpens, sedens in terra, mordens calcaneum equi; per interrogationem scribat: « Quisnam igitur serpens, nisi Antichristus, seductor ille, qui dictus in Genesi est, qui seduxit Evam, et Adamum supplantavit? » Si eum ipsum serpentem, qui primos parentes seduxit et supplantavit in paradiso, velit Hippolytus esse Antichristum, et in persona; quasi is, qui illa specie apparuit et locutus est, ipse tanta illa, quae de Antichristo feruntur, sit operaturus, qui vere ipse diabolus, aut, prout Hippolytus vocat, diaboli filius sit, non solum imitatione, sed etiam natura; unus scilicet quis nequissimorum daemonum, etsi non forte ille omnium princeps,
Whether St Hippolytus under the Antichrist understood the devil in person, and the serpent? — As regards the peculiar opinions and errors of this holy bishop, besides the things already said above concerning the Antichrist, it comes likewise to be observed here that this ancient Father in the book On Christ and the Antichrist, number 14, commenting upon that text of Genesis 49:17: Let Dan be a serpent, sitting upon the earth, biting the horse's heel; writes by way of interrogation: "Who then is the serpent, save the Antichrist, that seducer who is spoken of in Genesis (Gen. 3:1), who seduced Eve and supplanted Adam?" If Hippolytus means that that very serpent who seduced and supplanted our first parents in paradise is the Antichrist, and in person; as though he who appeared and spoke in that form were himself about to work those great things which are related of the Antichrist, being truly the devil himself, or, as Hippolytus calls him, the son of the devil, not only by imitation, but also by nature; namely some one of the most wicked demons, even if perhaps not that chief of all
Editors' notes and page, col. 384
Footnotes
(24, scripture) ‹anchor: in Genesi› · call in col 384 Gen. III, 1.
Genesis 3:1.
(printed under page 202)
(53) ‹anchor: circa Antichristum› · call in col 384
Vide hujus sect. cap. 1, art. 10, ubi de origine, nomine ac tempore Antichristi disseruimus; hic duntaxat adhuc animadvertimus, quod nullo modo audiendus sit sanctus Hippolytus, qui complementum septuaginta hebdomadum Danielis ad secundum Christi adventum, et ad Antichristum trahit; cum reliqui Ecclesiæ Patres ac Scripturæ interpretes melius ad Christi primum adventum spectare velint, ejusque mortis pœnam, et Hierosolymorum excidium, Romanorum duce Tito : quando exusto templo, sic victima cessavit et libatio, desolato loco quo solum facere licebat.
See this section, ch. 1, art. 10, where we discussed the origin, name and time of Antichrist. Here we note only this further point: St Hippolytus is by no means to be followed when he draws the completion of Daniel's seventy weeks to Christ's second coming and to Antichrist; for the other Fathers of the Church and interpreters of Scripture more rightly hold that it looks to Christ's first coming, to the punishment for his death, and to the destruction of Jerusalem under the Roman general Titus, when, the temple being burnt, sacrifice and libation thus ceased, the one place where it was lawful to offer them being laid waste.
(printed under page 202)
(54) ‹anchor: Adamum supplantavit› · call in col 384
S. Hippolyt., De Antichr., n. 14.
St Hippolytus, On Antichrist, no. 14.
(printed under page 202)
Page
- running head: SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI 384
- marginal letters: A « hil habet irritum,; B tum quem Jesus; C PECULIARES OPINIONES AC; D sona; quasi is,
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: hil habet irritum, ARTICULUS II. (Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [ni]hil; word split at end of column: prin-[ceps]
- other: the word princeps, was split at the column break and stands whole here (joined on receipt); check that the English reads whole across the break into col 385
et κατ' ἐξοχὴν diabolus: nihil ecclesiasticum est, sed prorsus abhorrens a fide, sive intelligatur fore Antichristi anima, sive alias illi persona. Animos hominum aliud genus spirituum agnoscit fides, a substantiis, quas Deus extra corpora condidit; nec sacra doctrina admittit, extra divinas Personas, quarum vis infinita, posse unum alteri a se diverso personam esse, seu illi hypostatice uniri. Quod vero Antichristus ita daemonis spiritu affletur, ut suis omnibus illum referat, et quasi alter ille serpens antiquus videatur, ipse seductor orbis, velut ille fuit primorum parentum, a Pauli verbis sensuque non abludit: recteque sensit Hippolytus, si ita voluit, etsi simplicius locutus est: nec improbabili conjectura, serpentis sic insidiantis typo designatum a Jacobo Antichristum ostendit. Verba Graecis sunt, ὄφις ἐφ' ὁδοῦ, ἐγκαθήμενος ἐπὶ τρίβου. Nec forte aliter scripserit Hippolytus. Auctor subdititii operis De Antichristo et mundi consummatione exponi non potest, quin verum natura daemonem Antichristum putaverit, qui sibi verum Hippolytum in eum sensum traxerit: quod vero Hippolyto non officiat, quin posteriori vero sensu exponi queat.
and pre-eminently the devil: there is nothing ecclesiastical in this, but it is altogether abhorrent from the faith, whether he be understood to be the soul of the Antichrist, or otherwise a person to him. Faith acknowledges the souls of men to be another kind of spirits from the substances which God created outside bodies; nor does sacred doctrine admit that, outside the divine Persons, Whose power is infinite, one being can be a person to another distinct from itself, or be hypostatically united to it. But that the Antichrist is so inspired by the spirit of the demon that in all his traits he reproduces him, and appears as it were another that ancient serpent, himself the seducer of the world, just as the former was of our first parents, does not differ from the words and sense of Paul: and Hippolytus thought rightly, if he meant thus, even though he spoke more simply: and by a not improbable conjecture he shows that the Antichrist was designated by Jacob under the type of a serpent thus lying in wait. The words in the Greek are: a serpent upon the way, sitting upon the path. Nor perhaps did Hippolytus write otherwise. The author of the spurious work On the Antichrist and the Consummation of the World cannot be expounded without having thought the Antichrist to be a demon by nature, who dragged the true Hippolytus into that sense for himself: which however does not stand in the way of Hippolytus being able to be expounded in the latter true sense.
De statu animarum post praesentem vitam. — Observandum secundo, juxta sanctum Hippolytum subterraneum quemdam locum haberi, in quem secedunt omnes homines post praesentem hanc vitam; hunc locum coaevum esse mundo, tresque diversas sedes comprehendere. Prima, quam ille vocat Abrahae sinum, justis est assignata; secunda peccatores retinet, qui ibidem patiuntur temporales poenas malis eorum operibus debitas; tertiam efformat quidam ignis aeterni lacus, quem nullus adhuc juxta S. Hippolytum, ingressus est; hoc quippe supplicium, ut ille ait, ad extremi judicii tempora reservatum est. Tunc injusti, inquit ille, aeterno supplicio adjudicabuntur; justi vero regnabunt in perpetuum; aeque enim docet hic auctor aeternam gloriam justis reservatam esse post universalem resurrectionem, etsi post mortem maxima perfruantur tranquillitate in contemplatione visibilium bonorum, et in spe perfruendi tandem aliquando coelestibus bonis. Opinatur insuper divus Hippolytus, in subterraneo illo loco angelos adesse qui praesint animabus ibidem detentis, quorum aliqui debeant justos eo in loco comitari; alii vero promeritas poenas injustis infligere. Opiniones istae audaciores sunt, quam par est; imo earum aliquae erroris notam non effugiunt: ast agnoscamus cum Photio errores istos, sicuti et alios, qui in ejusdem auctoris operibus deprehendi possunt, primorum Ecclesiae saeculorum indolem sapere; ideoque aequo jure hac una de causa magnum hunc virum damnari non posse:
On the state of souls after the present life. — It is to be observed secondly, that according to St Hippolytus there is a certain subterranean place into which all men withdraw after this present life; that this place is coeval with the world, and comprises three different abodes. The first, which he calls Abraham's bosom, is assigned to the just; the second holds sinners, who in the same place suffer temporal punishments due to their evil works; the third a certain lake of eternal fire forms, which no one as yet, according to St Hippolytus, has entered; for this punishment, as he says, is reserved for the times of the last judgement. Then the unjust, says he, will be adjudged to eternal punishment; while the just will reign for ever; for this author equally teaches that eternal glory is reserved for the just after the universal resurrection, even though after death they enjoy the greatest tranquillity in the contemplation of visible goods, and in the hope of enjoying at length at some time heavenly goods. St Hippolytus opines besides that in that subterranean place angels are present who preside over the souls detained in the same place, some of whom are to accompany the just in that place, while others inflict the deserved punishments upon the unjust. Those opinions are bolder than is fitting; nay, some of them do not escape the mark of error: yet let us acknowledge with Photius that those errors, just as also others which can be detected in the works of the same author, savour of the character of the first ages of the Church; and therefore that in fair justice for this one cause alone this great man cannot be condemned:
Editors' notes and page, col. 385
Footnotes
(55) ‹anchor: sanctum Hippolytum› · call in col 385
S. Hippolyt. in tractatu adv. Græcos et Platonem, apud Fabric., Opp. tom. I, p. 220, et apud Galland., t. II Biblioth. PP., colum. 451, n. 1.
St Hippolytus, in the treatise Against the Greeks and Plato, in Fabricius, Works vol. I, p. 220, and in Gallandi, Bibliotheca Patrum vol. II, col. 451, no. 1.
(printed under page 203)
(56) ‹anchor: cum Photio› · call in col 385
Photius in Biblioth., cod. CCII.
Photius in the Bibliotheca, codex 202.
(printed under page 203)
(57) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
« Audi quod gravius et periculosius est; ait enim Vates regius : Dorsa eorum semper incurva (Psal. LXVIII, 24). Id est, ut serviant gentibus non quadringentis quadraginta annis, ut Babylone, sed semper, inquit, in servitutem incurva. » S. Hippolyt., lib. contr. Judæos, num. 6; apud Fabric. tom. II Opp., pag. 3; et apud Galland. tom. II, col. 449.
"Hear what is graver and more dangerous; for the royal prophet says: Bend their backs for ever (Ps. 68:24). That is, so that they may serve the nations not for four hundred and forty years, as in Babylon, but for ever, he says, bent into servitude." St Hippolytus, the book Against the Jews, no. 6; in Fabricius, Works vol. II, p. 3; and in Gallandi, vol. II, col. 449.
(printed under page 203)
Page
- running head: 385 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A ceps, et κατ' ἐξοχὴν; B tum a Jacobo; C retinet, qui ibidem; D ibidem detentis, quorum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek phrases κατ' ἐξοχὴν and ὄφις ἐφ' ὁδοῦ, ἐγκαθήμενος ἐπὶ τρίβου); editors' matter: ceps, et κατ' ἐξοχὴν (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [prin]ceps
nam, ut egregie subjungit eruditus ille criticus, qui Scripturarum mysteria et abscondita explicare ac evolvere aggressi sunt omnium primi, vituperari non debent, si non omnia penetrarunt, imo e converso commendari debet eorum zelus, quantumvis parum profecerint in expositione eorum quae exponenda susceperunt.
for, as that learned critic excellently subjoins, those who were the very first of all to undertake to explain and unfold the mysteries and hidden things of the Scriptures ought not to be blamed if they did not penetrate all things; nay, on the contrary, their zeal ought to be commended, however little progress they made in the exposition of the things which they undertook to expound.
Error S. Hippolyti circa septuaginta hebdomades Danielis primum in adventu Antichristi complendas. — Innuimus jam superius vetustum hunc Patrem assecutum non esse verum sensum septuaginta hebdomadarum, de quibus est sermo in propheta Daniele, earumdemque hebdomadarum terminum nimium protendere; qui sane error excusabilis est etiam ob allatam modo rationem. Verum aequa facilitate excusari non potest alter ejusdem error, quando scilicet asserit tempus Babylonicae captivitatis fuisse annorum quadringentorum triginta, cum tamen Scriptura septuaginta tantum annorum fuisse dicat; sicuti videre est in propheta Jeremia cap. XXV, v. 9 et 11.
Error of St Hippolytus concerning the seventy weeks of Daniel to be fulfilled first at the coming of the Antichrist. — We have already intimated above that this ancient Father did not attain the true sense of the seventy weeks of which mention is made in the prophet Daniel, and stretches the limit of the same weeks too far; which error indeed is excusable also on account of the reason just alleged. Yet with equal facility another error of the same cannot be excused, namely when he asserts that the time of the Babylonian captivity was four hundred and thirty years, whereas Scripture says that it was only seventy years; just as may be seen in the prophet Jeremiah, chapter 25, verses 9 and 11.
ARTICULUS III.
ARTICLE III.
EDITIONUM S. HIPPOLYTI OPERUM RECENSIO.
REVIEW OF THE EDITIONS OF THE WORKS OF ST HIPPOLYTUS.
Ante initium praesentis saeculi nullus virorum eruditorum id laboris ac studii, quod tamen tot aliis longe inferiorum et temporum et meritorum scriptoribus impensum est multa cum laude, in se suscepit, ut S. Irenaei discipuli, et tantae vetustatis tantaeque auctoritatis doctoris, sancti scilicet Hippolyti Portuensis episcopi ac martyris opera, quaecunque reperiri possent, colligeret, collectaque publicaret.
Before the beginning of the present century none of the learned men took upon himself that labour and study—which nevertheless has been expended with much praise upon so many other writers of far inferior times and merits—of collecting whatsoever works could be found of the disciple of St Irenaeus, and a doctor of such great antiquity and such great authority, namely St Hippolytus, bishop of Portus and martyr, and publishing them when collected.
Primus, qui eam in cogitationem descendit, neglectamque hucusque spartam tentavit, erat praeclarissimus vir Joannes Millius, quive illam ornandam sumpsit, potuissetque egregie ornare, nisi ante manum ultimam appositam humanis rebus ereptus fuisset. Omnis quidem spes cum Millii corpore sepulta non credebatur, cum spissum volumen animadversionum ejus ad S. Hippolyti scripta Joannes Guilielmus Janus academiae Wittebergensis professor nactus esset, Hippolyteisque scriptis colligendis, expoliendis atque evulgandis insudare nuntiaretur. Sed incassum cultores antiquitatis ecclesiasticae hunc thesaurum exspectarunt ab eodem.
The first who entered into that thought, and attempted the province hitherto neglected, was the most distinguished man John Mill, who took it up to adorn it, and could have adorned it excellently, had he not been snatched away from human affairs before the final hand was put to it. All hope indeed was not believed to be buried with the body of Mill, since John William Janus, professor of the academy of Wittenberg, had obtained a thick volume of his animadversions upon the writings of St Hippolytus, and was reported to be sweating over collecting, polishing, and publishing the Hippolytean writings. Yet in vain did the cultivators of ecclesiastical antiquity await this treasure from the same.
Editio Graeco-Latina Fabricii. — Interea celeberrimus Fabricius doctor et professor SS. theologiae in gymnasio Hamburgensi, tot egregiis jam operibus litteratum orbem sibi devinctum habens, Hippolyti, de cujus persona et scriptis pro diffusissima sua lectione Bibliothecae suae Graecae lib. V, cap. 1, § 25, diligentissime disseruit, quaecunque supersunt, monumenta in unum corpus cogere ac
Graeco-Latin edition of Fabricius. — Meanwhile the most celebrated Fabricius, doctor and professor of sacred theology in the gymnasium of Hamburg, having already bound the learned world to himself by so many excellent works, resolved in his mind to gather into one body whatsoever monuments remain of Hippolytus—concerning whose person and writings, in accordance with his most extensive reading, he discoursed most diligently in his Bibliotheca Graeca, book 5, chapter 1, section 25—and
Editors' notes and page, col. 386
Page
- running head: SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 386
- marginal letters: A nam, ut egregie; B cilitate excusari non; C cunque reperiri possent,; D sticae hunc thesaurum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: nam, ut egregie, ARTICULUS III. (Lumper's dissertation)
splendide illustrata publici juris facere in animum induxit, inscius adhuc quem exitum habiturum esset cl. Jani consilium in edendis divi Hippolyti operibus. Post indefessam igitur in indagandis ac colligendis, quae injuria temporum nondum interciderunt, sancti nostri scriptis, duobus voluminibus in folio minore Hippolytum evulgavit laudatus Albertus Fabricius Hamburgi, quorum primum volumen anno 1716, alterum 1718 lucem publicam vidit.
to publish them splendidly illustrated, being still unaware what issue the design of the illustrious Janus in editing the works of St Hippolytus would have. After unwearying labour, therefore, in searching out and collecting the writings of our saint which through the injury of times had not yet perished, the praised Albert Fabricius published Hippolytus in two volumes in smaller folio at Hamburg, of which the first volume saw the public light in the year 1716, and the second in 1718.
In volumen prius congessit quaecunque Hippolyti hujus reperire potuit. Primo loco apparet liber De Antichristo, cujus editionem Combefisianam recensuit ad primam Parisiensem Gudianam anni 1661, nec pauca emendavit. Substratae etiam sunt singulis paginis adnotationes Combefisii; item eae, quas suae editioni manu propria alleverat Gudius, non omissis iis, quas Epistolis suis criticis inseruerat Tanaquillus Faber. His suas passim adjecit observationes ipse Fabricius, qui et veterum de illo libro testimonia adjunxit. Sequitur Canon paschalis, in jam memorata statua marmorea, ad urbem Romam effossa, Graece et Latine, cum iis, quae non solum in Canonem hunc Josephus Scaliger, Dionysius Petavius, Aegidius Bucherius, J. Dominicus Cassinus; sed etiam in Catalogum scriptorum Hippolyti, in eadem statua descriptum, Stephanus le Moyne, Thomas Galeus, Eduardus Bernardus, Guil. Caveus scripserunt, addita ipsa statua, tribus tabulis aeneis expressa. Cum vero praeter Canonem paschalem etiam Demonstrationem temporum Paschatis et Chronicon Hippolytus composuerit, testimonia veterum, in quibus unius ex his tribus mentio fit, conjunctim exhibentur una cum antiqua versione Latina Chronici, quod ex multis judiciis ad Hippolytum retulere doctissimi viri. Hisce adjunxit integram dissertationem Francisci Blanchini De Canone paschali Hippolyti, Romae anno 1703 editam, et disceptationes, quibus de anno primo imperii Severi Alexandri, in cathedra marmorea Hippolyti memorato, inter se contenderunt Virginius Valsechius, Philippus de la Turre, et Joan. Vignolius. Quae porro hic scripta, vel fragmenta Hippolyti, sunt: Demonstratio adversus Judaeos ex versione Latina Francisci Turriani, quam esse particulam Commentariorum Hippolyti in Psalmos Fabricius suspicatur; fragmenta ex libro adversus Graecos, qui inscribitur: Adversus Platonem de causa universi; ex opere adversus haereses, in quibus copiosiora sunt, quae Adversus Beronem, servata a Nicephoro Constantinopolitano et Anastasio Bibliothecario, et adversus Noetum Latine tantum, hic exhibentur; item Περὶ χαρισμάτων ἀποστολικὴ παράδοσις, Homilia in sacrosancta Theophania, primum edita ex mss. codice Thomae Galei, interspersis notulis Fabricii; et fragmenta ex Hippolyti Commentariis in varios Scripturae libros, et ex ejus Homiliis. Subjecta appendix complectitur scripta dubia et supposita, librum De consummatione mundi; De
Into the former volume he gathered whatsoever of this Hippolytus he was able to find. In the first place appears the book On the Antichrist, the Combefisian edition of which he revised according to the first Paris edition of Gudius of the year 1661, and emended not a few things. Placed beneath the individual pages also are the annotations of Combefis; likewise those which Gudius had added with his own hand to his edition, not omitting those which Tanneguy Le Fèvre had inserted in his Critical Epistles. To these Fabricius himself everywhere added his own observations, and also subjoined the testimonies of the ancients concerning that book. There follows the Paschal Canon, on the already mentioned marble statue dug up near the city of Rome, in Greek and Latin, with the things which not only Joseph Scaliger, Denis Petau, Gilles Boucher, and Jean-Dominique Cassini wrote upon this Canon, but also Étienne Le Moyne, Thomas Gale, Edward Bernard, and William Cave wrote upon the Catalogue of the writings of Hippolytus inscribed upon the same statue, with the statue itself added, engraved on three copper plates. And since besides the Paschal Canon Hippolytus composed also a Demonstration of the Times of Easter and a Chronicle, the testimonies of the ancients in which mention is made of one of these three are exhibited together, along with the ancient Latin version of the Chronicle, which from many indications the most learned men have referred to Hippolytus. To these he subjoined the entire dissertation of Francesco Bianchini On the Paschal Canon of Hippolytus, published at Rome in the year 1703, and the disputations in which Virginio Valsecchi, Filippo della Torre, and Giovanni Vignoli contended with one another concerning the first year of the reign of Severus Alexander, mentioned on the marble chair of Hippolytus. Moreover, the writings or fragments of Hippolytus here are: the Demonstration against the Jews from the Latin version of Francisco Torres, which Fabricius suspects to be a portion of the Commentaries of Hippolytus on the Psalms; fragments from the book against the Greeks, which is entitled: Against Plato on the Cause of the Universe; from the work against heresies, among which more copious are those Against Beron, preserved by Nicephorus of Constantinople and Anastasius the Librarian, and Against Noetus in Latin only, which are exhibited here; likewise the Apostolic Tradition on Charisms, the Homily on the Most Holy Theophany, first edited from the manuscript codex of Thomas Gale, with brief notes of Fabricius interspersed; and fragments from the Commentaries of Hippolytus on various books of Scripture, and from his Homilies. The subjoined appendix comprises doubtful and spurious writings, the book On the Consummation of the World; On
Editors' notes and page, col. 387
Page
- running head: 387 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A splendide illustrata publici; B singulis paginis adnotationes; C praeter Canonem paschalem; D daeos ex versione
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek title Περὶ χαρισμάτων ἀποστολικὴ παράδοσις); editors' matter: splendide illustrata publici (continuation of Lumper's dissertation)
duodecim apostolis, ubinam quisque eorum praedicaverit, ac ubi consummatus sit, quam nudam jam publicaverat Fabricius anno 1714, unacum tribus illis De vita Moysis libris, Gaulmini commentario illustratis pag. 508, sed nunc stipatam amplissimis adnotationibus Francisci Combefisii. Item De septuaginta apostolis, ac quae reperiri potuere ex scriptis Hippolyti junioris Thebani. Volumine posteriori horum operum continentur: Hippolyti Demonstratio adversus Judaeos, ejusdemque adversus haeresin Noeti, utraque nunc primum Graece ex codice Vaticano ms. edita, cum eadem Turriani versione, et iisdem notis, quae jam vol. I, pag. 228 et 235, insertae reperiuntur. Fragmenta ex Commentariis in Genesin, Graece et Latine itidem primum in lucem emissa ex Catena Patrum Graecorum 88 bibliothecae Vindobonensis, quae continent adnotationes ad Genes. I, 5, 6; III, 8; XLIX, 3, 4, 5, 11, 12, 16. Alia quaedam fragmenta, ut de Ezechia, in Isaiae XXXVIII, 5, ex cod. Coislin. 193. Locus ex Hippolyti sermone 2, in Danielem, citatus Eustrathio, cap. 19 adversus Psychopannychitas, et nonnulla in Renaudoti Historia patriarcharum Alexandr., pag. 360, Hippolyto ascripta, quae tamen potius Julii Romani esse praefatio docet. Commentationes in Genes. VII, 6; VIII, 1, et Deuteron. XXXIII, 1, ex Pentateucho Arabico biblioth. Bodleianae, quas cl. Gagnier inde excerptas Latine vertit: in quibus tamen nihil Commentariis Hippolyti Graecis in Genesim respondet. Loca nonnulla in Leontii Byzantini lib. I contra Nestorium, et in Concilio Lateranensi anno 649, pag. 281 et 287, ex Hippolyto adducta. Doctorum virorum adnotationes de Hippolyto, nominatim ex Sam. Petiti Eclog. chronolog., lib. III, cap. 2, de heckaedecaeteride et ex Georg. Bulli Defens. fid. Nicaen., sect. II, cap. 8, et sect. III, cap. 8, de doctrina Hippolyti, unacum J. Ern. Grabii adnotationibus eodem spectantibus. His denique subjungitur Hippolyti junioris Thebani fragmentum ex Chronico commentario ab Henrico Canisio in tom. III Lectionum antiquarum editum. Quia vero haec omnia non ultra 62 paginas implent, ad justum volumen conficiendum additur appendix complectens Spicilegium Patrum saeculi III, et Chalcidii Commentarios in Timaeum Platonis emendatos, et notis illustratos. In Spicilegio illo occurrunt: 1° Irenaei fragmenta nuper a cl. Christoph. Matth. Pfaffio edita; 2° Clementis Alexandrini fragmenta, quae in editione Oxoniensi tantum Graece leguntur; alia item a Macario Chrysocephalo, Anastasio Sinaita, Nicephoro CP. et Joan. Damasceno, ex Clemente Alex. citata; 3° Methodii Eubulii Convivium decem virginum a Leone Allatio et Petro Possino editum, nec non Combefisii Auctuario Bibl. Patrum insertum, cum Leonis Allatii diatriba de Methodiis; 4° Claudii Salmasii Commentarius inchoatus in Arnobium ex apographo Gudiano editus; 5° Acta Archelai, episcopi Mesopotamiae cum Manete, ex editione Laur. Alexandri Zaccagnii, quibus subjungitur
the Twelve Apostles, where each of them preached, and where he was consummated, which Fabricius had already published bare in the year 1714, together with those three books On the Life of Moses, illustrated by the commentary of Gaulmin at page 508, but now accompanied by the most ample annotations of François Combefis. Likewise On the Seventy Apostles, and what could be found from the writings of Hippolytus the Younger of Thebes. In the latter volume of these works are contained: Hippolytus's Demonstration against the Jews, and the same writer's Against the Heresy of Noetus, both now for the first time edited in Greek from a Vatican manuscript codex, with the same version of Torres, and the same notes, which are already found inserted in volume 1, pages 228 and 235. Fragments from the Commentaries on Genesis, in Greek and Latin, likewise for the first time sent forth into the light from the Catena of Greek Fathers 88 of the Vienna Library, which contain annotations upon Genesis 1:5, 6; 3:8; 49:3, 4, 5, 11, 12, 16. Certain other fragments, as concerning Hezekiah, upon Isaiah 38:5, from Coislin codex 193. A passage from the second discourse of Hippolytus on Daniel, cited by Eustratius, chapter 19 against the Psychopannychites, and some things in Renaudot's History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria, page 360, ascribed to Hippolytus, which nevertheless the preface teaches belong rather to Julius of Rome. Commentaries upon Genesis 7:6; 8:1, and Deuteronomy 33:1, from the Arabic Pentateuch of the Bodleian Library, which the illustrious Gagnier excerpted thence and translated into Latin: in which nevertheless nothing corresponds to the Greek Commentaries of Hippolytus on Genesis. Several passages in Leontius of Byzantium, book 1 Against Nestorius, and in the Lateran Council of the year 649, pages 281 and 287, adduced from Hippolytus. Annotations of learned men concerning Hippolytus, by name from Samuel Petit's Eclogae Chronologicae, book 3, chapter 2, on the sixteen-year cycle, and from George Bull's Defence of the Nicene Faith, section 2, chapter 8, and section 3, chapter 8, on the doctrine of Hippolytus, together with the annotations of Johann Ernst Grabe looking to the same point. To these finally is subjoined the fragment of Hippolytus the Younger of Thebes from his Chronicle Commentary, edited by Heinrich Canisius in volume 3 of the Lectiones Antiquae. And because all these things fill no more than 62 pages, to make up a just volume an appendix is added comprising a Spicilegium of Fathers of the third century, and Chalcidius's Commentaries on the Timaeus of Plato, emended and illustrated with notes. In that Spicilegium occur: 1. Fragments of Irenaeus lately edited by the illustrious Christoph Matthäus Pfaff; 2. Fragments of Clement of Alexandria, which in the Oxford edition are read only in Greek; others likewise cited from Clement of Alexandria by Macarius Chrysocephalus, Anastasius Sinaita, Nicephorus of Constantinople, and John of Damascus; 3. Methodius Eubulius's Banquet of the Ten Virgins, edited by Leo Allatius and Pierre Poussines, and also inserted in Combefis's Auctuarium of the Bibliotheca Patrum, with Leo Allatius's diatribe On the Methodii; 4. Claude Saumaise's unfinished Commentary on Arnobius, edited from the transcript of Gudius; 5. The Acts of Archelaus, bishop of Mesopotamia, with Manes, from the edition of Lorenzo Alessandro Zaccagni, to which is subjoined
Editors' notes and page, col. 388
Page
- running head: ET SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 388
- marginal letters: A duodecim apostolis, ubinam; B cem emissa ex Catena; C lib. I contra Nestorium,; D tarios in Timaeum
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: duodecim apostolis, ubinam (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at end of column: subjungi-[tur]
Ludov. Anton. Muratorii disquisitio in Manichaeorum anathematismos; 6° S. Pamphili martyris Expositio capitum Actuum apostolicorum, a Montfauconio et Zaccagnio edita, cui et aliae κεφαλαιομέτριαι ejusdem libri sacri subjunguntur; 7° Acta passionis S. Pamphili martyris ex libris Eusebii Caesariensis de illius Vita, cum notis Papebrochii; 8° Gregorii Thaumaturgi Expositio fidei.
Ludovico Antonio Muratori's disquisition upon the anathematisms of the Manichaeans; 6. St Pamphilus the martyr's Exposition of the Chapters of the Apostolic Acts, edited by Montfaucon and Zaccagni, to which also other chapter-divisions of the same sacred book are subjoined; 7. The Acts of the Passion of St Pamphilus the martyr from the books of Eusebius of Caesarea on his Life, with the notes of Papebroch; 8. Gregory Thaumaturgus's Exposition of the Faith.
Judicium Ceillierii de hac editione. — Caeterum, observante clarissimo Remigio Ceillierio, laudata Fabricii operum Hippolyteorum editio non satis nobis exacta videtur. Neque enim perdoctus editor ordinem temporum neque materiarum accurate observavit in recensendis ejus scriptis; atque verosimile est quod ea imprimi curaverit, prout ea receperit eique in manus inciderint. Haec tamen laus cl. Fabricio debetur, quod in colligenda fragmentorum copia scriptorum hujus Patris haud infeliciter laboraverit, quae in veterum auctorum operibus, in conciliorum Actis, et in bibliothecarum Parisiensis, Germaniae et Britanniae angulis dispersa latebant: quod ex iis quaedam e Graeco in Latinum traduxerit, plurimis observationibus maxime peraccommodis tum ad textum dilucidandum, tum ad doctrinae capita enodanda, quae prima fronte lectores perplexos reddere possent, illustraverit.
Judgement of Ceillier concerning this edition. — For the rest, as the most illustrious Remi Ceillier observes, the praised edition of the Hippolytean works by Fabricius does not seem to us sufficiently exact. For the very learned editor observed accurately neither the order of times nor that of subjects in reviewing his writings; and it is probable that he had them printed just as he received them and as they fell into his hands. This praise nevertheless is due to the illustrious Fabricius, that he laboured not unhappily in collecting an abundance of fragments of the writings of this Father, which lay hidden scattered in the works of ancient authors, in the Acts of the councils, and in the corners of the libraries of Paris, Germany, and Britain; that he translated some of them from Greek into Latin, and illustrated them with very many observations most suitable both for elucidating the text and for unravelling heads of doctrine which at first sight might render readers perplexed.
Editio Gallandii. — Anno 1766, vir perdoctus Andreas Gallandius Hippolyti Opera in ordinem digesta, duasque in partes tributa, rursus in lucem emisit sua in Bibliotheca veterum Patrum, tomo II, Venetiis. In hac editione quae ampliora sunt, sive integra, sive mutila, priorem locum obtinent; posteriorem vero fragmenta reliqua minutiora pro argumenti dignitate aut varietate discreta. Primum locum in editione Gallandii Demonstratio S. Hippolyti de Christo et Antichristo occupat; hanc excipit opusculum in Susannam. Tertio sequitur Demonstratio adversus Judaeos. Dein fragmentum insigne subjicitur ex libro adversus Graecos, qui inscribitur Adversus Platonem de causa universi. Quintum locum occupat egregia sane lucubratio adversus Noetum. Tandem Hippolyteorum partem primam apud Gallandium claudunt fragmenta 8, excerpta ex sermone de theologia et incarnatione contra Beronem et Heliconem (alias Helicem). Huic Gallandius praecedentium editorum observationes adjecit, neque notas omisit, quas eruditus Sirmondianorum editor margini allevit; Anastasii versioni testimoniorum Hippolyteorum Combefisianam recensionem apposuit, atque integras Capperonnierii animadversiones subdidit. In parte II continentur reliqua scripta Hippolytea: et 1° occurrunt excerpta Commentariorum in aliquot sacrae Scripturae libros a Joanne Alberto Fabricio tum e ms. codicibus eruta, tum ex antiquis Ecclesiae scriptoribus studiose collecta; 2° exhibentur varia λόγων seu Sermonum homiliarumque fragmenta: iisque praemittitur homilia in sancta Theophania;
Edition of Galland. — In the year 1766, the very learned man Andrea Galland again sent forth into the light the Works of Hippolytus arranged in order, and divided into two parts, in his Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum, volume 2, at Venice. In this edition the pieces which are more ample, whether entire or mutilated, hold the former place; and the remaining smaller fragments, separated according to the dignity or variety of their subject-matter, hold the latter. The first place in the edition of Galland the Demonstration of St Hippolytus on Christ and the Antichrist occupies; the brief work On Susanna follows this. In the third place follows the Demonstration against the Jews. Next a notable fragment is subjoined from the book against the Greeks, which is entitled Against Plato on the Cause of the Universe. The fifth place the truly excellent treatise Against Noetus occupies. Finally, eight fragments excerpted from the discourse on theology and the incarnation against Beron and Helicon (otherwise Helix) close the first part of the Hippolytean works in Galland. To this Galland added the observations of preceding editors, nor did he omit the notes which the learned editor of the works of Sirmond added to the margin; to the version of Anastasius of the Hippolytean testimonies he placed alongside the Combefisian recension, and subjoined the entire animadversions of Capperonnier. In the second part are contained the remaining Hippolytean writings: and first occur excerpts of the Commentaries upon several books of sacred Scripture by Johann Albert Fabricius, both dug out of manuscript codices and studiously collected from ancient writers of the Church; secondly are exhibited various fragments of discourses or Sermons and homilies: and to them is prefixed the homily On the Holy Theophany;
Editors' notes and page, col. 389
Footnotes
(58) ‹anchor: not visible› · call in col ? (not visible in the foot images)
Remi Ceillier, Histoire génér. des auteurs, tom. II, pag. 372.
Remi Ceillier, Histoire générale des auteurs [sacrés et ecclésiastiques], vol. II, p. 372.
(printed under page 205)
Page
- running head: 389 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A tur Ludov. Anton. Muratorii; B in manus inciderint.; C Venetiis. In hac; D nem (alias Helicem).
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed (except embedded Greek words κεφαλαιομέτριαι and λόγων); editors' matter: tur Ludov. Anton. Muratorii (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [subjungi]tur; word split at end of column: Theo-[phania]
3° sequitur De charismatibus apostolica traditio. Ultimo tandem loco sistitur Canon paschalis Graece ac Latine, interprete eruditissimo Francisco Blanchinio, notisque Aegidii Bucherii illustratus.
thirdly follows the Apostolic Tradition on Charisms. In the last place finally is set the Paschal Canon in Greek and Latin, with the most learned Francesco Bianchini as translator, and illustrated with the notes of Gilles Boucher.
Aliae editiones quorumdam opusculorum S. Hippolyti. Editio Cycli paschalis. — Caeterum novae editionis operum S. Hippolyti spem fecit v. cl. J. Guil. Janus historiae in academia Wittenbergensi professor, in cujus manibus fuerunt schedae Millianae, quae cum nonnulla adhuc inedita complectetur, tum alia ex unius tantum codicis apographo edita, cum pluribus melioris notae ms. collata, multisque partibus emendatiora exhibebit, iis, quae aperte Hippolyto supposita sunt, segregatis, aut saltem distinctis: quorumdam etiam novas versiones juxta relationem in Actis eruditorum Lipsiensibus 1718, pag. 444, daturum se promisit. Sed promissum non exsolvit. Antequam Fabricius scripta S. Hippolyti unum in corpus collegisset, quaedam jam separatim impressa visebantur. Sic Cyclus paschalis in opere quod cl. Scaliger De emendatione temporum confecit impressus Graece occurrit 1583, Paris. in fol., Lugduni Batavorum 1598, Coloniae Allobrogum seu Genevae 1629. Cl. Gruterus in collectione Inscriptionum Heidelbergae 1600 evulgata, et anno 1707 Amstelodami reimpressa, eumdem Cyclum paschalem Graece publicavit. P. Bucherio interprete Latine prodiit anno 1634, in fol., Antwerpiae, cum commentario et veterum de S. Hippolyto testimoniis in ejusdem Bucherii Doctrina temporum. Franciscus Blanchinius hunc Cyclum postea inseruit dissertationibus suis De calendario et cyclo Juliano Romae 1705 impressis.
Other editions of certain minor works of St Hippolytus. Edition of the Paschal Cycle. — For the rest, the illustrious man Johann Wilhelm Janus, professor of history in the academy of Wittenberg, in whose hands were the papers of Mill, gave hope of a new edition of the works of St Hippolytus, which will both comprise some things hitherto unpublished, and will exhibit others—edited from the transcript of one codex only—collated with several manuscripts of better note, and more emended in many parts, with those things which have been openly forged under the name of Hippolytus separated, or at least distinguished: he promised also that he would give new versions of certain pieces, according to the report in the Acta Eruditorum of Leipzig for 1718, page 444. Yet he did not fulfil the promise. Before Fabricius had collected the writings of St Hippolytus into one body, certain pieces were already seen printed separately. Thus the Paschal Cycle occurs printed in Greek in the work which the illustrious Scaliger composed On the Emendation of Times in 1583, at Paris in folio, at Leiden in 1598, and at Cologne of the Allobroges or Geneva in 1629. The illustrious Gruter in his collection of Inscriptions published at Heidelberg in 1600, and reprinted in the year 1707 at Amsterdam, published the same Paschal Cycle in Greek. With Father Boucher as translator it came forth in Latin in the year 1634, in folio, at Antwerp, with a commentary and the testimonies of the ancients concerning St Hippolytus in the same Boucher's Doctrina Temporum. Francesco Bianchini afterwards inserted this Cycle in his dissertations On the Calendar and Julian Cycle printed at Rome in 1705.
Editiones libri de Antichristo et opusculi in Susannam. — Demonstrationem De Christo et Antichristo primus in lucem extulit, Graecisque typis edidit 1661, in 8°, Marquardus Gudius Holsatus: deinde anno 1672, Graeco-Latine vulgavit illustravitque Franciscus Combefisius in Auctario novissimo Bibliothecae Patrum, tomo I, pag. 26-62, Parisiis in fol., addito etiam opusculo in Susannam a pag. 50-56. Combefisii versio Latina quinque post annos repetita in Bibliotheca PP. Lugdunensi tom. XXVII, pag. 1-9, anno scilicet 1677.
Editions of the book on the Antichrist and of the minor work on Susanna. — The Demonstration On Christ and the Antichrist Marquard Gude of Holstein first brought forth into the light, and edited in Greek type in 1661, in octavo: next in the year 1672, François Combefis published and illustrated it in Greek and Latin in the Auctarium Novissimum of the Bibliotheca Patrum, volume I, pages 26-62, at Paris in folio, with the minor work On Susanna also added at pages 50-56. The Latin version of Combefis was repeated five years later in the Lyons Bibliotheca Patrum, volume XXVII, pages 1-9, namely in the year 1677.
Editiones tractatus adversus Judaeos et Graecos. — Demonstrationem adversus Judaeos, sive ejus fragmentum Latine ex Francisci Turriani versione primus vulgavit Possevinus in Apparatu sacro, ubi de Hippolyto disserit, Venetiis 1603, et Coloniae 1608, in fol.; et Carolus Josephus Imbonatus Mediolanensis in Bibliotheca Latino-Hebraica Romae 1694, in fol., pag. 74. Fragmentum insigne adversus Graecos et Platonem Graece, ut ex Italia acceperat, primus edidit David Hoeschelius in notis ad Photium pag. 923, Augustae Vindelicorum 1601, in
Editions of the treatise against the Jews and the Greeks. — The Demonstration against the Jews, or a fragment of it, Antonio Possevino first published in Latin from the version of Francisco Torres in his Apparatus Sacer, where he discourses concerning Hippolytus, at Venice in 1603, and at Cologne in 1608, in folio; and Carlo Giuseppe Imbonati of Milan in his Bibliotheca Latino-Hebraica at Rome in 1694, in folio, page 74. The notable fragment Against the Greeks and Plato in Greek, as he had received it from Italy, David Hoeschel first edited in his notes to Photius, page 923, at Augsburg in 1601, in
Editors' notes and page, col. 390
Page
- running head: T SCRIPTIS S. HIPPOLYTI. 390
- marginal letters: A phania; 3° sequitur; B saltem distinctis: quorumdam; C anno 1634, in fol.,; D repetita in Bibliotheca
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: phania; 3° sequitur (continuation of Lumper's dissertation); word split at start of column: [Theo]phania
fol., et recusum Genevae 1613, Rothomagi 1653, in fol. Deinde cum sua versione Stephanus le Moyne in Variis sacris, pag. 53, Lugduni Batavorum 1685, 1694, in 4°. Cum eadem interpretatione etiam recudendum dedit J. Albertus Fabricius in appendice ad opera Josephi Judaei, Lipsiae 1691, in fol.
folio, and reprinted at Geneva in 1613, and at Rouen in 1653, in folio. Next with his own version Étienne Le Moyne published it in his Varia Sacra, page 53, at Leiden in 1685 and 1694, in quarto. With the same translation Johann Albert Fabricius also gave it to be reprinted in the appendix to the works of Josephus the Jew, at Leipzig in 1691, in folio.
Editiones tractatus adversus haeresin Noeti, et contra Beronem et Helicem. — Fragmentum De Deo uno et trino, et de mysterio incarnationis contra haeresin Noeti sub homiliae nomine Latine edidit ex sua versione Gerardus Vossius Tungrensis, ad calcem Gregorii Thaumaturgi, Moguntiae, 1604, in 4°, notis etiam subjectis a pag. 58-68. Qua vero de causa cum operibus S. Gregorii Thaumaturgi hic tractatus Parisiis 1622 reimpressus non fuerit, ignoramus. Anno tamen 1618 in Bibliotheca Patrum Coloniensi sine notis prodiit, et Lugduni 1677, tom. III, et in supplemento Morelliano Paris. 1639, tom. I, p. 620. Fragmenta octo de theologia et incarnatione adversus Beronem et Helicem haereticos, Latine ex Tur-
Editions of the treatise against the heresy of Noetus, and against Beron and Helix. — The fragment On the One and Triune God, and on the Mystery of the Incarnation against the Heresy of Noetus, Gerard Vossius of Tongeren edited in Latin under the name of a homily from his own version, at the end of Gregory Thaumaturgus, at Mainz, 1604, in quarto, with notes also subjoined at pages 58-68. For what reason, however, this treatise was not reprinted with the works of St Gregory Thaumaturgus at Paris in 1622, we do not know. In the year 1618, nevertheless, it came forth without notes in the Cologne Bibliotheca Patrum, and at Lyons in 1677, volume 3, and in the Morellian supplement, Paris, 1639, volume 1, page 620. Eight fragments on theology and the incarnation against the heretics Beron and Helix, in Latin from Tor-
riani versione primus vulgavit Canisius tom. V Antiquarum lectionum, pag. 154, Ingolstadii 1604, in 4°. Haec fragmenta cum eadem versione in Bibliothecis SS. Patrum Coloniensi, Lugdunensi, et Parisiis 1654 reimpressa fuerunt. Eadem fragmenta Latine pridem vertit Anastasius apocrisiarius, inque Collectaneis Anastasii Bibliothecarii edidit Parisiis 1620, in 8°, Sirmondus, additis e Turriani codice Graecis, atque ita Graece ac Latine leguntur etiam in tom. III Operum Sirmondi Parisiis 1696, in fol., pag. 583. Graece item et Latine Operum sancti Maximi tom. I praemissa edidit Combefisius, qui et Anastasii versionem recensuit. Eadem exinde in suum Hippolytum transtulit Fabricius. Posthaec ex Combefisii editione Graeca desumpsit Basnagius, ac Turriani versioni adjunxit tom. I Thesauri Canisiani; ad cujus calcem praeterea v. cl. Claudii Capperonnierii animadversiones in Anastasii versionem cum Graecis collatam adjecit anno 1725, Amstelodami in folio.
of Turrianus's version Canisius first published in vol. V of the Antiquae lectiones, p. 154, at Ingolstadt in 1604, in quarto. These fragments with the same version were reprinted in the Bibliothecae SS. Patrum of Cologne, Lyons, and at Paris in 1654. Anastasius the apocrisiary had long before translated the same fragments into Latin, and Sirmond published them in the Collectanea of Anastasius Bibliothecarius at Paris in 1620, in octavo, having added the Greek from Turrianus's codex, and thus they are read in Greek and Latin also in vol. III of Sirmond's Works at Paris in 1696, in folio, p. 583. Combefis likewise published them in Greek and Latin prefixed to vol. I of the Works of Saint Maximus, and he also revised the version of Anastasius. Fabricius thereafter transferred the same into his Hippolytus. After these things Basnage took them from the Greek edition of Combefis, and joined them to the version of Turrianus in vol. I of the Thesaurus Canisianus; at the end of which, moreover, he added the observations of the illustrious Claude Capperonnier upon the version of Anastasius collated with the Greek, in the year 1725, at Amsterdam, in folio.
Editors' notes and page, col. 391
Footnotes
(59) ‹v. cl. Cangius› · call in col 391
Du Cange, Praefat. ad Chronicon Pasch., § 18 et 23.
Du Cange, Preface to the Chronicon Paschale, §§ 18 and 23.
(printed under page 206)
(60) ‹abierunt Pearsonius› · call in col 391
Pearson., Dissert. 1 de success. prim. Rom. pontif. cap. 10, § 1.
Pearson, Dissertation 1 on the succession of the first Roman pontiffs, ch. 10, § 1.
(printed under page 206)
(61) ‹et Dodwellus› · call in col 391
Dodwel., Dissert. singul. de Rom. pontif. prim. success., cap. 14, § 19.
Dodwell, Single dissertation on the succession of the first Roman pontiffs, ch. 14, § 19.
(printed under page 206)
(62) ‹Franciscus Blanchinius› · call in col 391
Blanch., Dissert. de Can. pasch. S. Hippolyti, cap. 3, § 7 seqq., et apud Fabric. tom. Opp. I, pag. 114 et seqq.
Bianchini, Dissertation on the Paschal Canon of St Hippolytus, ch. 3, § 7 ff., and in Fabricius, vol. I of the Works, p. 114 ff.
(printed under page 206)
Page
- running head: 391 DE VITA ET SCRIPTIS S.
- marginal letters: A fol., et recusum; B Anno tamen 1618; C gius (59). Sed in; D gesserat Hippolytus demonstrationem
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; mid-column full-width headings (DE ANONYMO CHRONICI AUCTORE SUB AL... / Varia eruditorum placita de huj...) cut off at right edge, not set; editors' matter: fol., et recusum, Inter Opera S. Hippolyti (Lumper's dissertation and anonymous Chronicle preface); words split at end of upper and lower sections of column: Tur-[riani], scripto-[rum]
- other: a full-width band stands across cols 391/392 in mid-page: the 1 paragraph(s) above it in col 392 are set here, after the 2 above it in col 391 (reading order, moved on receipt); the band itself (its title lines) is not set by the volunteer page: set it here, at the move, with full_width
- other: the column continues with Inter Opera S. Hippolyti episcopi et martyris (another unit); not set here
Editors' notes and page, col. 392
Page
- running head: S. HIPPOLYTI. 392
- marginal letters: A riani versione; B ac Turriani; C Canisius Antiquarum; D unde Hippolyto
- old-edition numerals: (none)
- other: Latin only, no Greek printed; editors' matter: riani versione primus; rum primus. Occurrebat; word split at start of column (Tur-riani) and at start of second section (Ho-rum); two full-width heading lines cut off on the left (...ORE SUB ALEXANDRO SEVERO CONSCRIPTI. and ...lacita de hujus Chronici auctore.) between the first and second paragraphs, not set; word split at end of column (Canisia-num)
- other: the 1 paragraph(s) of this column above the full-width band are set under col 391 (reading order, moved on receipt)
- other: the text of this column below the full-width band belongs to the next unit; not set here (rail-only part)