Appearance      Marker   

 

<<  Contents  >>

Anti-Marcion

Footnotes

Show All Footnotes

Show All Footnotes & Jump to 7852

Introduction, by the American Editor.

[7842] Phil. ii. 6.

[7843] John iv. 24.

[7844] This doctrine of the soul’s corporeality in a certain sense is treated by Tertullian in his De Resurr. Carn. xvii., and De Anima v. By Tertullian, spirit and soul were considered identical. See our Anti-Marcion, p. 451, note 4, Edin.

[7845] [On Tertullian’s orthodoxy, here, see Kaye, p. 502.]

Chapter VIII.—Though the Son or Word of God Emanates from the Father, He is Not, Like the Emanations of Valentinus, Separable from the Father. Nor is the Holy Ghost Separable from Either. Illustrations from Nature.

[7846] “The word προβολή properly means anything which proceeds or is sent forth from the substance of another, as the fruit of a tree or the rays of the sun. In Latin, it is translated by prolatio, emissio, or editio, or what we now express by the word development. In Tertullian’s time, Valentinus had given the term a material signification. Tertullian, therefore, has to apologize for using it, when writing against Praxeas, the forerunner of the Sabellians” (Newman’s Arians, ii. 4; reprint, p. 101).

[7847] προβολή.

[7848] See Adv. Valentin. cc. xiv. xv.

[7849] Matt. xi. 27.

[7850] John i. 18.

[7851] John viii. 26.

[7852] John vi. 38.

[7853] 1 Cor. ii. 11.

[7854] John xiv. 11.

[7855] John i. 1.

[7856] John x. 30.

[7857] Literally, the προβολή, “of the truth.”

[7858] [Compare cap. iv. supra.]

[7859] Or oneness of the divine empire.

[7860] Or dispensation of the divine tripersonality. See above ch. ii.

Chapter IX.—The Catholic Rule of Faith Expounded in Some of Its Points. Especially in the Unconfused Distinction of the Several Persons of the Blessed Trinity.

[7861] “Modulo,” in the sense of dispensation or economy. See Oehler and Rigault. on The Apology, c. xxi.

[7862] “In his representation of the distinction (of the Persons of the Blessed Trinity), Tertullian sometimes uses expressions which in aftertimes, when controversy had introduced greater precision of language, were studiously avoided by the orthodox. Thus he calls the Father the whole substance, the Son a derivation from or portion of the whole.” (Bp. Kaye, On Tertullian, p. 505). After Arius, the language of theology received greater precision; but as it is, there is no doubt of the orthodoxy of Tertullian’s doctrine, since he so firmly and ably teaches the Son’s consubstantiality with the Father—equal to Him and inseparable from him. [In other words, Tertullian could not employ a technical phraseology afterwards adopted to give precision to the same orthodox ideas.]

 

 

 

10 per page

 

 

 Search Comments 

 

This page has been visited 0697 times.

 

<<  Contents  >>