uishes very decidedly
between "factum esse" and "procedere".]
[Footnote 540: Adv. Prax. 2: "Custodiatur [Greek: oikonomias]
sacramentum, quae unitatem in trinitatem disponit, tres dirigens, tres
autem non statu, sed gradu, nec substantia, sed forma, nec potestate,
sed specie, unius autem substantiae et unius status et potestatis."]
[Footnote 541: See the discussions adv. Prax. 16 ff.]
[Footnote 542: Tertull., adv. Marc. III. 6: "filius portio
plenitudinis." In another passage Tertullian has ironically remarked in
opposition to Marcion (IV. 39): "Nisi Marcion Christum non subiectum
patri infert."]
[Footnote 543: Adv. Prax. 9.]
[Footnote 544: See the whole 14th chap. adv. Prax. especially the words:
"I am ergo alius erit qui videbatur, quia non potest idem invisibilis
definiri qui videbatur, et consequens erit, ut invisibilem patrem
intellegamus pro plenitudine maiestatis, visibilem vero filium
agnoscamus pro modulo derivationis." One cannot look at the sun itself,
but, "toleramus radium eius pro temperatura portionis, quae in terram
inde porrigitur." The chapter also shows how the Old Testament
theophanies must have given an impetus to the distinction between the
Deity as transcendent and the Deity as making himself visible. Adv.
Marc. II. 27: "Quaecunque exigitis deo digna, habebuntur in patre
invisibili incongressibilique et placido et, ut ita dixerim,
philosophorum deo. Quaecunque autem ut indigna reprehenditis,
deputabuntur in filio et viso et audito et congresso, arbitro patris et
ministro, miscente in semetipso hominem et deum in virtutibus deum, in
pusillitatibus hominem, ut tantum homini conferat quantum deo detrahit."
In adv. Prax. 29 Tertullian showed in very precise terms that the Father
is by nature impassible, but the Son is capable of suffering. Hippolytus
does not share this opinion; to him the Logos in himself is likewise
[Greek: apathes] (see c. Noetum 15).]
[Footnote 545: According to Tertullian it is certainly an _essential
part of the Son's nature_ to appear, teach, and thus come into
connection with men; but he neither asserted the necessity of the
incarnation apart from the faulty development of mankind, nor can this
view be inferred from his premises.]
[Footnote 546: See adv. Prax. 4. the only passage, however, containing
this idea, which is derived from 1 Cor. XV.]
[Footnote 547: Cf. specially the attempts of Plotinus to reconcile the
abstract unity which is conceived as the prin
|