| << | Contents | >> |
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 3818
Introductory Notice to Constitutions of the Holy Apostles.
[3808] [Drey makes this one of the most recent canons of the collection.—R.]
[3809] [Of unknown origin, probably recent.—R.]
[3810] [Drey considers Canon 69 to be very ancient, but also intimates that it and Canon 70 were taken from the pseudo-Ignatian Epistle to the Philippians; see the same, chap. xiii., latter half, vol. i. p. 119, of this series.—R.]
[3811] [With Canons 70, 71, compare Synod of Elvira (a.d. 305 or 306), Canons 49, 50, in Hefele, vol. i. pp. 158, 159. Drey, however, derives them from Canons 37–39 of Laodicea (a.d. 363).—R.]
[3812] Lev. v. 16. [It is argued from the theft forbidden that this canon is more recent; its origin is unknown.—R.]
[3813] [The wealth here implied points to a comparatively late origin; Hefele assigns it to the second half of the third century, but Drey gives a later date.—R.]
[3814] [Hefele thinks both this and the following canon to be later than the Nicæan Council. Drey, however, derives Canon 74 from the council at Chalcedon (a.d. 451), a view opposed by both Bickell and Hefele.—R.]
[3815] Deut xix. 15. [According to Drey this canon is from the Council of Constantinople (sixth canon), in a.d. 381.—R.]
[3816] [Drey derives this from Canon 23, Synod of Antioch, a.d. 341.—R.]
[3817] [Hefele: “The Canons 77–79, inclusive, belong to the first three centuries of the Church; their origin is unknown.”—R.]
[3818] [Comp. Apostolic Constitutions, viii. 32, p. 495, from which this may have been taken.—R.]
[3819] [Drey regards Canon 80 as an imitation of the second canon of Nicæa, which is, however, much fuller; comp. Hefele, i. p. 377. On the principle, comp. 1 Tim. iii. 6 and similar passages.—R.]
[3820] Can. iv. prius.
[3822] [The contents of this canon point to a late date. Drey regards it as an abridgment of the third canon of Chalcedon (a.d. 451).—R.]
[3823] [Of unknown origin and date.—R.]
[3824] Matt. xxii. 21. [This also Drey traces to the Council of Chalcedon, a.d. 451 (Canon 7); but Hefele opposes this view here, as in the case of the other canons (30, 67, 74, 81) which Drey derives from that source.—R.]
[3825] [Or rather, “the emperor” (βασιλἐα having that sense). Hefele refers this to the time of the Arian struggle, when the emperors were involved in ecclesiastical controversies.—R.]
[3826] [Hefele: “This is probably the least ancient canon in the whole collection.” With this opinion there is general concurrence, since the mention of the Constitutions among the canonical books indicates the hand of the last compiler of that collection of writings. Whoever he was, he was not Clement of Rome.—R.]
[3827] 1 Tim. II. 1. Compare (ποιεῖσθαι) the Greek here with that of the LXX. in Ex. xxix. 36, 38, 39, 41; also Ex. x. 25, and so throughout the Old Testament. Note also Eph. v. 19 and Col. iii. 16; and the kiss, 1 Cor. xvi. 20.
[3828] 1 Cor. xi. 23. To me there is great significance in the fact that the Apostle received this as an original Gospel from the Lord Himself. Truly (2 Cor. xi. 5) he was not “a whit behind,” even that chief Apostle who reclined in the bosom of the Great High Priest and adorable Lamb of God as He instituted the feast.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0318 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page