FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   346   347   348   349   350  
351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358   359   360   361   362   363   364   365   366   367   368   369   370   371   372   373   374   375   >>   >|  
erficienti. Hunc ex deo prolatum didicimus et prolatione generatum et idcirco filium dei et deum dictum ex unitate substantiae, nam et deus spiritus (that is, the antemundane Logos is the Son of God). Et cum radius ex sole porrigitur, portio ex summa; sed sol erit in radio, quia solis est radius nec separatur substantia sed extenditur (cf. adv. Prax. 8). Ita de spiritu spiritus et deo deus ut lumen de lumine accensum. Manet integra et indefecta materiae matrix, etsi plures inde traduces qualitatis mutueris: ita et quod de deo profectum est, deus est et dei filius et unus ambo. Ita et de spiritu spiritus et de deo deus modulo alternum numerum, gradu non statu fecit, et a matrice non necessit sed excessit. Iste igitur dei radius, ut retro semper praedicabatur, delapsus in virginem quandam et in utero eius caro figuratus nascitur homo deo mixtus. Caro spiritu instructa nutritur, adolescit, adfatur, docet, operatur et Christus est." Tertullian adds: "Recipite interim hanc fabulam, similis est vestris." As a matter of fact the heathen must have viewed this statement as a philosophical speculation with a mythological conclusion. It is very instructive to ascertain that in Hippolytus' book against Noetus "the setting forth of the truth" (c. 10 ff.) he begins with the proposition: [Greek: Theos eboulethe kosmon ktisai]. The Logos whose essence and working are described merely went forth to realise this intention.] [Footnote 532: See Hagemann, Die roemische Kirche (1864), p. 172 ff.] [Footnote 533: See my detailed exposition of the _orthodox_ side of Tertullian's doctrine of the Trinity ("orthodox" in the later sense of the word), in Vol. IV. There it is also shown that these formulae were due to Tertullian's _juristic_ bias. The formulae, "una _substantia_, tres _personae_", never alternates in his case with the others, "una _natura_, tres _personae_"; and so it remained for a long time in the West; they did not speak of "natures" but of "substances" ("nature" in this connection is very rare down to the 5th century). What makes this remarkable is the fact that Tertullian always uses "substance" in the concrete sense "individual substance" and has even expressed himself precisely on the point. He says in de anima 32: "aliud est substantia, aliud natura substantiae; siquidem substantia propria est rei cuiusque, natura vero potest esse communis. Suscipe exemplum: substantia est lapis, ferrum; duritia lapidis et ferri natura subs
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   346   347   348   349   350  
351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358   359   360   361   362   363   364   365   366   367   368   369   370   371   372   373   374   375   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

substantia

 
Tertullian
 
natura
 

radius

 
spiritus
 
spiritu
 

substance

 

Footnote

 

formulae

 

personae


orthodox

 

substantiae

 
ktisai
 

Trinity

 
kosmon
 

juristic

 

proposition

 
doctrine
 

eboulethe

 

essence


roemische

 

Kirche

 

Hagemann

 

realise

 

working

 
detailed
 

exposition

 

intention

 
siquidem
 

precisely


individual

 

expressed

 

propria

 

ferrum

 
duritia
 

lapidis

 

exemplum

 

Suscipe

 

cuiusque

 
potest

communis
 
concrete
 

begins

 

remained

 

alternates

 

natures

 

century

 

remarkable

 
substances
 

nature