ho has grasped the idea of an independent
science of Christianity, of a theology which, in spite of its width and
magnitude, is a branch of knowledge distinguished from others; and was
also the first to mark out the paths of this science."]
[Footnote 475: Tertullian seems even to have had no great appreciation
for the degree of systematic exactness displayed in the disquisitions of
Irenaeus. He did not reproduce these arguments at least, but preferred
after considering them to fall back on the proof from prescription.]
[Footnote 476: The more closely we study the writings of Tertullian, the
more frequently we meet with inconsistencies, and that in his treatment
both of dogmatic and moral questions. Such inconsistencies could not but
make their appearance, because Tertullian's dogmatising was only
incidental. As far as he himself was concerned, he did not feel the
slightest necessity for a systematic presentation of Christianity.]
[Footnote 477: With reference to certain articles of doctrine, however,
Tertullian adopted from Irenaeus some guiding principles and some points
of view arising from the nature of faith; but he almost everywhere
changed them for the worse. The fact that he was capable of writing a
treatise like the de praescr. haeret., in which all proof of the intrinsic
necessity and of the connection of his dogmas is wanting, shows the
limits of his interests and of his understanding.]
[Footnote 478: Further references to Tertullian in a future volume.
Tertullian is at the same time the first Christian _individual_ after
Paul, of whose inward life and peculiarities we can form a picture to
ourselves. His writings bring us near himself, but that cannot be said
of Irenaeus.]
[Footnote 479: Consequently the _spirit_ of Irenaeus, though indeed
strongly modified by that of Origen, prevails in the later Church
dogmatic, whilst that of Tertullian is not to be traced there.]
[Footnote 480: The supreme God is the Holy and Redeeming One. Hence the
identity of the creator of the world and the supreme God also denotes
the unity of nature, morality, and revelation.]
[Footnote 481: What success the early-Christian writings of the second
century had is almost completely unknown to us; but we are justified in
saying that the five books "adv. haereses" of Irenaeus were successful,
for we can prove the favourable reception of this work and the effects
it had in the 3rd and 4th centuries (for instance, on Hippolytu
|