1 An actual dependence on Gregory of Nyssa has sometimes been ascribed to Hilary. But Gregory was surely too yong for this. He may himself have borrowed from Hilary; But more probably both derived their common element from Eastern writers like Basil of Ancyra.
2 This is certainly the best translation of Tractatus; the word is discussed on a later page.
3 The latest date which I have seen assigned for his birth is 320, by Fechtrup, in Wetzer-Welte's Encyclopaedia. But this is surely inconsistent with his styling Ursacius and Valens, in his first Epistle to Constantine, `ignorant and unprincipled youths. 0' This was written about the year 355 before Hilary knew much of the Arian controversy or the combatants, and was ludicrously inappropriate, for Ursacius and Valens were elderly men. He had found the words either in some of Athanasius' writings or in the records of the Council of Sardica, and borrowed them without enquiry. He could not have done so had he been only some thirty-five years of age; at fifty-five they are natural enough.
4 It is impossible to agree with Zingerle (Comment. Wolfflin. p.218) that Hilary was under the necessity of using a Greek and Latin Glossary. Such a passage as Tract. in Ps. cxxxviii. 43, to which he appeals, shows rather the extent than the smallness of Hilary's knowledge of Greek. What he frankly confesses, there as elsewhere, is ignorance of Hebrew. The words of Jerome (Ep. 34, 3 f.) about Hilary's friend, the presbyter Heliodorus, to whom he used to refer for explanations of Origen on the Psalms, are equally incapable of being employed to prove H ilary's defective Greek. Heliodorus knew Hebrew, and Hilary for want of Hebrew found Origen's notes on the Hebrew text difficult to understand, and for this reason, according to Jerome, used to consult his friend; not because he was unfamiliar with Greek.
5 His vocabulary is very poorly treated in the dictionaries; one of the many Signs of the neglect into which he has fallen. There are at least twenty-four words in the Tractatus super Psalmos which are omitted in the last edition of George's' lexicon, and these good Latin words, not technical terms invented for purposes of argument. Among the most interesting is quotiensque for quotienscumque; an unnoticed use is the frequent cum quando for quandoquidem. Of Hilary's other writings there is as yet no trustworthy text; from them the list of new words could at least be doubled.
9 Cf. Tract. in Ps. xiii. I, Trin. I. 38
10 Yet he strangely reproaches his Old Latin Bible with the use of nimis for ualde, Tract. in Ps. cxxxviii. 38. This employment of relative for positive terms had been common in literature for at least a century and a half.
11 E.g. Trin. v. II, vii. 14, ix. 4.
13 Trin. x. 14. This is a very remarkable allusion. Celsus, vii. prae., confidently assumes that all surgical operation must be painful.
16 Tract. in Ps. cxviii. Ain. 16; it is from Plin. N.H. 37, 32.
17 Tract. in Ps. lvii. 3. It suggests virgil, Ovid, Silius, and others.
20 Tract. in Ps. i. 7, lxi. 2, Ixiii. 5, &c. As usual, Hilary does not name his opponents.
21 Hilary's legendary daughter Abra., to whom he is said to have written a letter printed in the editions of his works, is now generally abandoned by the best authorities, e.g. by Fechtrup, the writer, in Wetzer-Welte's Encyclopaedia, of the best short life of Hilary.
24 This is on the assumption, which seems probable, that Irenaeus was not yet translated from the Greek. He certainly influenced Tertullian, and through him Hilary; and his doctrine of the recapitulation of mankind in Christ, reappearing as it does in Hilary, though not in Tertullian, suggests that our writer had made an independent study of Irenaeus. Even if the present wretched translation existed, he would certainly read the Greek.
25 Dr. Bigg's Bampton Lectures upon them are full of hints for the student of Hilary.
27 E.g. Tract. in Ps. cxxix. 4 f.
29 Comm. in Matt. v. I. It may be mentioned that the chapters of the Commentary do not coincide with those of the Gospel.
30 Comm. in Matt. xvi. 4, theotetam quam deitatem Latini nuncupant, xxvi. 5, theotetam quam deitatem nuncupamus. The strange accusative theotetam makes it the more probable that we have here a specimen of the primitive Greek vocabulary of Latin Christendom of which so few examples, e.g. Baptism and Eucharist, have survived. Cyprian had probably the chief share in destroying it; but the subject has never been examined as it deserves.
31 So especially xii. 18. There is similarly a possible allusion to Marcellus' teaching in xi. 9, which, however, may equally well be a reminiscence of some cognate earlier heresy.
32 Maffei's Introduction, §15.
33 xxxi. 3, penes quem erat antequam nasceretur.
34 See Ebert, Litteratur des Mittelalters, I. 139.
35 Syn. 91; regeneratus pridem et in episcopatu aliquantisper manens. The renderings `long ago 0' and `for some time 0' in this translation seem rather too strong.
36 E.g. Trin. viii. I. The bishop is a prince of the Church.
37 Sacerdos in Hilary, as in all writers till near the end of the fourth century, means `bishop 0' always.
38 By Dr. Robertson of King's College, London. This, and Professor Gwatkin's Studies of Arianism, are the best English accounts.
40 The Apologia contra Arianos, p. 100 ff. in Dr. Robertson's translation.
41 Origines du culte chretien, p. 88.
42 Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, p. 134.
45 There is much more evidence to this effect in Reuter, Augustinische Studien, p. 182 f. It was probably due to jealousy between West and East; cf. the way in which John of Jerusalem ignored the African decision in Pelagius' case. But the West was ignorant, as well as jealous, of the East. Even in his last years, after his sojourn in Asia Minor, Hilary believed that Jerusalem was, as had been prophesied, an uninhabited ruin; Tr. in Ps. cxxiv. ?2, cxxxi. ??18, 23, cxlvi. ?I.
48 This sparing of Marcellus in the cave of a Western like Hilary, may have been a concession to the incapacity of the West, e g. Julius of Tome and the Council of Sardica, to see his error. But this is not so likely as that it was a falling in with the general policy of Athanasius, as was the rare mention or the homoousion; cf. Gwatkin, op. cit. 42. n. Hilary was singularly independent of Western opinion, and his whole aim was to win the East.
49 No such examination seems to have been made as that to which Reuter in his admirable Augustinische Studien has subjected some of the thoughts of St. Augustine.
50 Harnack, Dogmengeschichte, ii. p. 243 n, (ed. 3). Hilary is, `making all allowance for dependence on Athanasius, an independent thinker, who has, indeed, excelled the bishop of Alexandria as a theologian. 0'
51 Hort, Two Dissertations, p. 27.
53 Cf. Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, p. 130.
54 Ib., p. 159. It would not be fair to judge Hilary by the de Synodis alone. The would-be diplomatist, in his eagerness to bring about a reconciliation, is not quite just either to the facts or to his own feelings.
58 Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, p. 163.
60 Sulp. Sev. ii. 42, iuxta ea, quae Nicaeae erant a patribus conscripta.
61 Sulpicius Severus, Chron. ii. 45, says that he addressed at this time three petitions to the Emperor. This is, of course, not impossible; but it is more likely that he had in his mind the two appeals, that before the exile and the present one, and the invective.
63 Reading habet for habeo, but the text is obscure.
64 It is true that the Nicene Council is not named here, the allusion is obvious. The Conservatives had actually objected to the novelty of the Creed; and the Arians had, as Hilary goes on to say, used the pretext of novelty to destroy the Gospel. The Council of Nicaea was thirty-five years before, and is very accurately described as a `Synod of our fathers. 0'
65 Cf. Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, p. 182.
66 `Bodies lifted up without support, women hanging by the feet without their garments falling about their face. 0' The other references which the Benedictine editor gives for this curious statement are evidently borrowed from this of Hilary. From the time of the first Apologists exorcism is, of course, constantly appealed to as an evidence of the truth of Christianity, but usually, in somewhat perfunctory language, and without the assertion that the writer has himself seen what he records. Hilary himself does not profess to be an eye-witness.
67 This is a telling point. Constantius had been notoriously unsuccessful in his Persian Wars.
68 The text is corrupt, but it is not probable that Hilary means that Paulinus was first relegated to Phlygia and then to some pagan frontier district, if such there was. It is quite in Hilary's present vein to assume that because the Montanists were usually called after the province of their origin, in which they were still numerous, therefore all Phrygians were heretics and outside the pale Christendom. If hordeo be read for horreo the passage is improved. Paulinus had either to be satisfied with rations of barley bread, the food of slaves, or else to beg from the heretics. Such treatment is very improbable, when we remember Hilary's own comfort in exile. But passions were excited, and men believed the worst of their opponents. We may compare the falsehoods in Walker's Sufferings of the Clergy, and in Neal's Puritans, which were eagerly believed in and after our own Civil War.
69 Hilary had previously (§ 27) asserted that `the Apostle has taught us to communicate with the tombs of the saints. 0' This is an allusion to Rom. xii. 13, with the strange reading `tombs 0' for `necessities 0' (mneivaiz for creivaiz), which has, in fact, considerable authority in the mss. of the New Testament and in the Latin Christian writers. How far this reading may have been the cause, how far the effect, of the custom of celebrating the Eucharist at the tombs of Martyrs, it is impossible to say. The custom was by this time more than a century old, and one of its purposes was to maintain the sense of unity with the saints of the past. Constantius, by denying their doctrine, had made himself their enemy.
70 Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, p. 244.
71 Rufinus, Hist. Eccel. i. 30, 31, and, dependent on him, Socrates iii. 10 and Sozomen v. 13.
72 Cf. Dr. Bright, Waymarks, p. 217. n.
74 Op. cit. I. 31. The recantation of Liberius and of the Italian bishops may be read in Hlilary's 12th Fragment.
76 Similarly in iv. 2 he alludes to the first book, meaning that which we call first, though, as we saw, in v. 3 he speaks of our fifth as his second.
77 i.e. in the passage introduced as a connecting link with the books which now precede it, when the whole work was put into its present shape.
78 E.g. ix. 31 to iii. 12, ix. 43 to vii. 7.
81 This heresy is not even mentioned in xii. 6, where the opening was obvious.
82 Dr. Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, p. 226.
83 Cf. Gore's Dissertations, p. 134.
84 St. Luke xxii. 32, where e0deh/qhn is translated as a passive. Christ is entreated for Peter. There seems to be no parallel in Latin theology.
85 E.g. the cento from the De Trinitate attached to the Invective against Counstantius.
87 Newman, Arians of the Fourth Century, ii. v. 2.
89 E.g. bk. iii. is largely reproduced in ix.; ii. 9 f.==xi. 46
90 E.g. i. 19, ii. 2, iii. I, iv. 2, viii. 53, xi. 46f.
91 Cf. v. I (beginning of column 130 in Migne), x. 4.
93 Cf. Ad Const. ii. 8, in writing which his own words in the De Trinitate must have come into his mind. He had probably borrowed the thought from Origen, contra Celsum, i. 62. Similar apostrophes are in v. 19, vi. I9 f., 33.
96 E.g. in his masterly treatment, from his point of view, of the Old Testament Theophanies, iv. 15 f.
101 Cf Kruger, Lucifer Bischof von Calaris, p. 39.
104 Jerome, Apol. adv. Rufinum, i, 2 says that the total length of the Commentaries on Job and the Psalms was about 40,000 lines, i.e. Virgilian hexameters. The latter, at a tough estimate, must be nearly 35,000 lines in its present state. But Jerome, as we shall see, was not acquainted with so many Homilies as have come down to us; we must deduct about 5,000 lines, and this will leave l0,000 for the Commentary on Job, making it two sevenths of the length of the other. Jerome, however, is not careful in his statements of lengths; he calls the short De Synodis `a very long book 0' Ep. v. 2.
105 Tractatus ought to be translated thus. It is the term, and the only term. Used so early as this for the bishop's address to the congregation; in fact, one might almost say that tractare, tractatus in Christian language had no other meaning. It is an anachtonism in the fourth century to render praedicare `preach ; 0' cf. Duchesne, Liber Pontificalis, i. 126.
106 E.g. fundamen, Tr. in Ps. cxxviii. 10, germen, cxxxiv. 1, revolubilis, ii. 23 peccamen, ii. 9 fin., and often. The shape of sentences though simple is always good; to take one test word, saepe, which was almost if not quite extinct in common use, occurs fairly often near the end of a period, where it was needed for rhythm, which frequenter would have spoiled. Some Psalms, e.g. xiii., xiv., are treated more rhetorically than others.
107 Psalm li. is the only exception, due, no doubt, to careless transcription. The Homilies on the titles of Psalms ix. and xci. do not count; they are probably spurious, and in any case are incomplete, as the text of the Psalms is not discussed.
108 So Zingerle, Preface, p. xiv, to whom we owe the excellent Vienna Edition of the Homilies, the only part of Hilary's writing which has as yet appeared in a critical text. The writer of the former of these two Homilies, in § 2, says that the title of a Psalm always corresponds to the contents. This is quite contrary to Hilary's teaching, who frequently points out and ingeniously explains what seem to him, to be discrepancies.
109 E.g. in the Instruction or discourse preparatory to the Homilies, and in the introductory sections of that on Ps. 118 (119).
110 E.g. Instr. in Ps., § 12, the fifty days of rejoicing during which Christians must not prostrate themselves in prayer, nor fast.
112 The account of exorcism given on Ps. 64, § 10, suggests Cyptian, Ad. Don. 5, but the subject is such a commonplace that nothing definite can be said.
113 He is here cited by the volume and page of the edition by Lommatzsch. His system of interpretation is admirably described in the fourth of Dr. Bigg's Bampton Lectures, The Christian Platonists of Alexandria.
114 Hil. Tr. in Ps. 13, § 3, his igitur ita grassantibus, sq. = Origen (ed. Lommatzsch) xii. 38.
115 E.g. Instr. in Ps., § 15 = Origen in Eusebius, H. E. vi. 25 (Philocalia 3), Hilary on Ps. 51, §§ 3, 7 = Origen xii. 353, 354, and very often on Ps. 118 (119), e.g. the Introduction = Or. xiii. 67 f. Aleph, § 12 = ib. 70. Beth, § 6 = ib. 71, Caph, §§ 4, 9 = ib. 82, 83, &c
117 Origen xiii. 134, Hilary has omitted this from his Homily on Ps. 134, § 12.
118 Instances of such independence are Ps. 118, Daleth, § 6 (xiii. 74), 119, § 15 (ib. 108), 122, § 2 (ib. 112), 133, § 3 (ib. 131). The references to Origen are in brackets.
119 E.g. Ps. 118, Heth, § 10, 121, § 1; Origen xiii. 80, 111.
121 Origen xiii. 72; Hilary, Ps. 118, Gimel, § 1.
122 Cf. also Ps. 118, Heth, § 7, Koph, § 4, with Origen xiii. 79, 98. Here again the spirit of independence manifests itself towards the end of the work.
123 Cf. Ps. 118, Samech, § 6 Origen xiii. 92.
124 Ps. 143, § 4; Origen xiii. 149.
126 J. F. Gamurrini, S. Hilarii Tractatus de Mysteriis et Hymni, etc., 4to., Rome, 1887. The De Mysteriis occupies pp 3 - 28.
129 ib. p. 21; there is the not uncommon play on the two senses of colligere.
131 It must be confessed that some authorities refuse to regard this work as the De Mysteriis of Hilary. Among these is Ebert, Litteratur des Mittelaiters, p. 142, who admits that the matter might be Hilary's, but denies that the manner and style are his.
132 Comm. in Ep. ad Gal. ii. pref.: Hilarius in hymnorum carmine Gallos indociles vocat. This may mean that Hilary actually used the words `stubborn Gauls 0' in one of his hymns. There would be nothing extraordinary in this; the early efforts, and especially those of the Arians which Hilary imitated for a better purpose, often departed widely from the propriety of later compositions, as we shall see in one of those attributed to Hilary himself.
133 It is true that the Fourth Council of Toledo (a.d. 633) in its 13th canon couples Hilary with Ambrose as the writer of hymns in actual use. But these canons are verbose productions, and this may be a mere literary flourish, natural enough in countrymen and contemporaries of Isidore of Seville, who knew, no doubt from Jerome's Viri Illustres, that Hilary was the first Latin hymn writer.
134 Two of the simplest stanzas are as follows:- Extra qualm caper potent Flex quid potuit fidemens humana res tantas penitusmanet Filius in Patre, credulus assequi,rursus quem penes sit Pater ut incorporeo ex Deodignus, qui genitus est profectus fueritFilius in Deum. primogenitus Dei.It is written in stanzas of six lines in the ms.; the metre is the second Asclepiad. Gammurrini, the discoverer, and Fechtrup (in Wetzer Welte's Encyclopaedia) regard it as the work of Hilary. but the weight of opinion is against them.
135 By Gamurrini in Studi e documenti, 1884, p. 83 f.
136 Printed in full by Mai, Patrum Nova Bibliotheca, p. 490. He suspends judgment, and will not say that it is unworthy of Hilary. The Benedictine editor, Coustant, gives a few stanzas as specimens, and summarily rejects it.
137 The four quarters of the universe are ortus, occasus, aquilo, septentrio; one of these last must mean the south. This would point to some German land as the home of the author; in no country of Romance tongue could such an error have been perpetrated. Perire is used for perdere, but this is not unparalleled.
138 In Mai's Patrum Nova Bibliotheca, vol. i., is a short treatise on the Genealogies of Christ. The method of interpretation is the same as Hilary's, but the language is not his; and the terms used of the Virgin in §§ 11, 12, are not as early as the fourth century. In the same volume is an exposition of the beginning of St. John's Gospel in an anti-Arian sense. In spite of some difference of vocabulary, there is no strong reason why this should not be by Hilary; cf. especially, §§ 5-7. Mai also prints in the same volume a short fragment on the Paralytic (St. Matt. ix.2), too brief for a judgment to be formed. In Pitra's Spicilegium Solesmense, vol. i., is a brief discussion on the first chapters of Genesis, dealing chiefly with the Fall. It appears, like the Homilies on the Psalms, to be the report of some extemporary addresses, and is more likely than any of the preceding to be the work of Hilary. It is quite in his style, but the contents are unimportant. But we must remember that the scribes were rarely content to confess that they were ignorant of the name author whom they transcribed; and that, being as ill-furnished with scruples as with imagination, they assigned everything that came to hand to a few fandliar names. Two further works ascribed to Hilary are obviously not his. Pitra, in the volunme of an already cited. has printed considerable remains of a Commentary on the Pauline Epistles, which really belongs to Theodore of Mopsuestia; and a Commentary on the seven Canonical Epistles, recently published in the Spicilegium Casinense, vol iii., is there attributed,with much reason,to his namesake of Arles.
140 It is clear from Hilary's account (Contra Auxentium. §7) that the decision lay with the laymen. Auxentius, in his account of the matter, does not even mention the bishops.
141 This was a gross exaggeration. They cannot have been more than 400, and probably were less and we must remember that the Homoean decision was only obtained by fraud, as Auxentius well knew.
143 There are fifteen in the collection, but the second and third which are as long as the rest together, and are obviously extracts from the same work, are not by Hilary. He expressly (Fragm. i. §6) that he commence with the council of Arles and the exile of Paulinus. These documents narrate at great length events which began six years earlier, and with which Hilary and his province had no direct concern. This proves that the fragments are not a portion of the Liber adversus Ursacium et Valentem. Internal evidence proves not less clearly that they cannot be excerpts from some other work of Hilary. In Fragm. ii. §21 we are told that apparently in the year 349 Athanasius excommunicated Marcellus of Aneyra. It is of course, notorious that he never did so; the mistake is one which Hilary could not possibly have made. None the less, these fragments are both in themselves and in the documents which they embody, one of our most important authorities for the transactions they narrate, and are indisputably contemporary and authentic nor is there any reasonable doubt as to the genuineness of the thirteen. Those of them which reveal the inconstancy of Liberius have been assailed by some Roman Catholic writers, though they are accepted by others. The same suspicion has extended to others among the fragments, because they are found in company with these revelations concerning Liberius. But the doubts have been suggested by the wish to disbelieve.
144 This correspondence which Hilary has preserved (Fragm.xiii-xv)is interesting as shewing how difficult it must have been for the laity to determine who was, and who was not, a heretic, when all parties used the same Scriptural terms in commendation themselves and condemnation of their opponents. It begins with a public letter in which Germinius makes a declaration of faith in Homoeousion terms, without any mention of the reasons which had induced him to depart from the Homoean position. This is followed by a reproachful letter, also intended for publicity, from Valens, Ursacius, and others. They had refused to attend to the rumour of his defection: but now are compelled, by his own published letter, to ask the plain question, whether or not he adheres to `the Catholic Faith set forth and confirmed by the Holy Council at Rimini. 0' If he had added to the Homoean formula, which was that the Son is `like the Father, 0' the words `in substance 0' or `in all things, 0' he had fallen into the justly condemned heresy of Basil of Ancyra. They demand an explicit statement that he never had said, and never would say, anything of the kind; and warn him that he is gravely suspected, complaints of his teaching having been made by certain of his clergy to neighbouring bishops, which they trust will be proved groundless. Germinius made no direct reply to this letter, but addressed a manifesto to a number of more sympathetic bishops, containing the scriptural proofs of the divinity of Christ and recalling the fact that the Homoean leaders, before their own victory, had acquiesced in the Homoeousian confession. Any teaching to the contrary is the work, not of God, but of the spirit of this world, and he entreats those whom he addresses to circulate his letter as widely as possible, lest any should fall through ignorance into the snares of the devil. Germinius was assured of safety in writing thus. Valentinian's support of Auxentius had proved that bishops might hold what opinions they would on the great question provided they were not avowed Arians. Germinius had been a leader of the Homoean party, and it is at least possible that his change of front was due to his knowledge that the Emperor, though he would not eject Homoeans, had no sympathy with them and would allow them no influence. In fact, the smaller the share of conscience, the greater the historical interest of Germinius' action as shewing the decline of Homoean influence in the West.
146 Those which have been in constant use in the preparation of this chapter have been an excellent article by Th. Forster in the Theologische studien und Kritiken for 1888, p 645 ff., and two full and valuable papers by Dr. Baltzer on the Theologie and Christology of Hilary in the programm of the Rottweil Gymnasium for 1879 and 1889 respectively. I have unfortunately not had access to Wirthmuller's work, Die Lehre d. hl. Hil. uber die Selbstenausserung Christi, but the citations in Baltzer and Schwane give some clue to its contents. The Introduction to the Benedictine edition is useful, though its value is lessened by an evident desire to make Hilary confirm to the accepted opinions of a later age. Dorners great work on the Doctrine of the person of Christ, in the English translation, with the Dogmengeschichte of Schwane (ed.2, 1895) and that of Harnack(ed 3, 1894) have also been constantly and profitably consulted. Indebttedness to other works is from time to time acknowledged in the notes.
149 St. John v. 44 in Trin. ix. 22
150 Thus the Book of Baruch, regarded as part of Jeremiah, is cited with the same confidence as Isaiah and the other prophets in Trin. v. 39.
151 E.g. Tr. in Ps. cxviii. Aleph. i, cxxviii. 12. cxviii. 8. It must be confessed that Hilary's illustrations of the principle are not always fourtunate.
152 Thus in Trin. xi. 15, in commenting on Ps. xxii. 6, he puts forward two alternative theories of the generation of worms, only one of which can be true, while both may be false. But he uses both, to illustrate two truths concerbning our Lord.
162 Similar arguments are often used: cf. Tr. in Ps. cxlv. I.
166 E.g. Comm. in Matt. xviii. 2; Tr. in Ps. cxix, 20, cxxxiv. 12, cxxxvi. 6, 7: Trin. i.6,.
168 The unhesitating use of the Theophanies of the Old Testament.as direct evidence for the divinity of Christ is noteworthy, Similar to the usual proof. for the distinction of Persons within the 'Trinity, from the altcrnate use of plural and singular, are the arguments in Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Iod, 5, cxvii. 4.
169 It is worth notice that he makes no use of Origen's mystical interpretation of the Canticles. Silence in such a case is itself a criticism.
170 Compare such a passage as Trin. x. 24 with his use of the proof-texts against Arianism.
172 E.g. Tr. in Ps. xci. to, cxviii. Iod, x5, cxxxiv. 1, cxxxv. I.
173 E g. Trin. vii' 13; and cf. the argument which is also Athanasian of vii. 31.
174 Beside the passages menentioned on p. xxx., it only occurs in Instructio Psalmorum §13
175 The translation of the De Trinitate in this volume may give a somewhat false impressionin this respect. For the sake of concicseness the word Person has been often in the English where it is absent, and absent designedly in the Latin. The word occurs Trin. iii . 23 in.,iv .42,v. 10,26,vii. 39,40 and in a few other places.
176 Concorporatio, Comm. in Matt, vi. I ; corporatio, Tr. in Ps, i, 14, ii. 3, and often; corporalitas Deus, Comm, in Matt. iv, 14, Tr. in Ps. li. 16; corporalitas, Comm. in Matt. iv. 14 (twice), Instr. Ps. vi. In the De Trinitate he usually prefers a periphrasis ; - assumpta caro, assumpsit carnem. Corporatio is used of man's dwelling in a body in Trin. xi, 15 and De Mysteriis, ed. Gamurrini, p. 5.
177 It occurrs. in the De Synodis. 69, but in that work Hilary is writing as an advocate in defence of Ianguage used by others, not as the exponent of his own thoughts. It also occurs once or twice in translations from the Greek, probably by another hand than Hilary's; but from his own authorship it is completely absent.
178 Trin. v. to, Syn. 69, `God is One not in Person, but in nature, 0'Trin. iv. 42, `Not by oneness of Person but by unity of substance; 0' vi. 35, `the birth of a living Nature from a living Nature 0' of God or Christ. is simply a periphrasis. The two natures in the Incarnate Christ are also mentioned, though, as we shall see, Hilary here aIso avoids a precise nomenclature..
179 Tr. in Ps. cxxxi. 6, `The supreme achievement of Christ was to render man, instructed in the knowledge of God, worthy to be God's dwelling-place ; 0' cf. ib §23
180 Tr. in Ps. cxviii, Aleph., §I
185 Deus Verbum often; Verbum alone rarely, if ever. Dorner with his iteration of `Logos, 0' gives an altogether false impression of Hilary's vocabulary.
187 Doctrine of the Person of Christ, 1. ii. p. 302, English translation. The passages to which he refers are Comm. in Matt. xi. 12; Tr. in Ps. xci. 6 ; Trin. ii. 3. ix. 69. There is a good, though brief, statement of this view in Mason's Faith of the Gospel, p. 56.
188 Trin, xii. 21, `the birth is in the generation and the generation in the birth, 0'
189 Discourses against the Arians, iii. 58ff ; see Robertson's notes in the Athanasius volume of this series. p.426
190 E.g. Syn. 35, 37, 59, Trin. iii. 4, vi. 21, viii . 54
191 Cf. Baltzer, Theologie d. hl. Hil. p, 19 f.
192 Hort, Two Dissertations, p. 21, and cf. p. xvi., above.
193 It constantly appears, though with all due safeguards, in the De Synodis, where sympathy as well as policy impelled him to approximate the language used by his friends. Similarly in Trin. iii. 23, he argues, from the admitted likeness, that there can be no difference. But, as we saw, this part of the De Trinitate is probably an early work, and does not represent Hilary's later thought
196 Cf. Sulp Sev., Chron. ii. 42 for the Eastern suspicion that the West held a trionyma unio ;-one Person under three names, the citations in Westcott's Gospel of St. John, additional note to xiv. 28
197 This was the doctrine of all the earlier theologians, soon to be displaced in the stress of controversy by the opinion that theinferiority concerns the Son only as united with man. See the citations in Wescot's Gospel of St. John, additional note to xiv, 28.
200 Trin. xi. 21 ff., on I Cor. xv, 21 ff.
202 Bardenhewer, Patrologie, p. 377.
203 This is one of Hilary's many reminiscences of Origen. Athanasius brought the father into direct connection with the world ; cf. Harnack, Dogmengesch. ii. 206 (ed.3)
204 Trin. xii. 35 ff. The passage is treated at much greater length in Athanasius' Discourses against the Arians, ii. 18fi where see Robertson's notes.
205 Trin. xii. 45; at the Incarnation Christ is `created in the body, 0' and this is connected with His creation for the begining of the ways of God.
206 Westcott, essay on `The Gospel of creation, 0' in his edition of St John's Epistles, Where, however Hilary is not mentioned.
208 Trin.ii. 6, xii.4, &c. He is also often named Jesus Christ in this connection, e.g. Trin. iv. 6
209 According to Eusebius' computation, which Hilary would probably accept without dispute, there were 5,228 years from the creation to our Lord's commencement of his mission in the 15th year of Tiberius, a.d. 29.
210 E.g. Trin. iv . 27; Tr. in Ps, lxviii, 19
211 Trin. iii.9 ; cf. St. John xvii. 3.
213 Trin. ii. 27. The sarne conclusion is constantly drawn in the Comm. in Matt.
214 E g. Trin. ix. 4, 14, 51; Tr. in Ps. ii. 11, 25.
216 E.g. Tr. in Ps. cxxxviii. 3.
217 This, in contrast with God, Who is Life, is proved by the fact that certain bodily growths can be removed without our being conscious of the operation ; Trin. vii. 28.
218 Cf. Trin. vii. 23, x 15, 16. Similarly in the Eumenides 637, Aechylus Makes Apollo excuse Orestes' murder of Clytae nnestra on the go and that the mother is not the parent, but only the nurse of the germ. This is contrary to Aristotle's teaching; Aeschylus and Hilary evidently represent a rival current of ancient opinion..
219 Trin. x. 20. In Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Iod, 6, 7, this thought is developed. Man has a double origin. First, he is made after the likeness of God. This is the soul, which is immaterial and has no resemblance and owes no debt, as of effect to cause, to any other nature (i.e. substance) than God. It is not His likeness, but is after His likeness. Secondly, there is the body, cornposed of earthly matter.
220 Trin. ii. 3of., viii. 23f .
221 Trin. x. 16, caro non aliunde originem sumpserat quam Verbo, and ib. 15,18,25. Dorner, I. ii., p.403, n.i points out that this is exactly the teaching of Gregory of Nyssa.
222 This view that the conception by the Holy Ghost means conception by the Son is consistently held by Hilary throughout his writings. It appears in the earliest of them; in Comm. in Matt. ii. 5, Christ is `born of a woman; . . . Made flesh through the Word. 0' So in Trin. ii. 24 He is `born of the Virgin and of the Holy Ghost, Himself ministering Himself in this operation.... By His own, that is God's., overshadowing power He sowed for Himself the beginings of His body ordained that His flesh should commence to exist ; 0'and Trin. x 16
223 Trin. x. 16; cf. ib. 17. 1n the Instructio. Pslamorum,§6, he speaks in more usual language;-adventus Domini ex virgine in hominem. procreandi, and also in some other passage. Dorners view (1. ii 403 f. and note 74, p. 533) differs from that here taken. But he is influenced (see especially p. 404) by the desire to save Hilary's consistency rather than to state his Actutal opinion on. And Hilary was too early in the field, too anxiously employed in feeling his way past the pitfalls of heresy, to escape the danger of occasional inconsistency.
224 Trin. iii. I9, perfectum ipsa de suis non imminuta generavit. So ib, ii. 25, uigenitus Deus.... Virginis utero insertus acc rescit. He grew there, but nothing more. In Virginem exactly corresponds to ex Virgine.
225 Trin. xii. 50; it would be a watering of the sense to regard commixtio in this passage as simply equivalent to coitio.
228 He often and emphatically repudiates the use which the Monarchians made of them, e.g. Trin.iv, 4.
229 E.g. Trin. x. 22 in The human soul is clearly intended. Schwane, ii, 268, justly praises Hilary for greater accuracy than his contemporaries in laying stress upon each of the constituent elements of Christ's humanity, and especially upon the soul ; in this respect following Tertullian and Origen
230 In Trin. x. 21 f. is an argument analogous to that of the De Synodis concerning the Godhead. Christ is Man because He is perfectly like man, just as in the Homoeusian argument He is God because He is perfectly like God.
231 E.g. Comm. in Matt. I. ; Tr. in Ps. lxviii. 19.
233 Ib, viii, 45, 47, ix. 14, &c.
234 This `evacuation 0' or `exinauition 0' is represented in Tr. in Ps. lxvii. 4 by the more precise metaphor of a vessel drained of its liquid contents.
235 Hilary has devoted his Homily on Psalm lxviii. to this subject. In §25 he asks, `How could He exist in the form of God? 0' There are many equally emphatic statements throughout his writings.
236 Baltzer and Schwane have been followed in this matter, in opposition to Dorner.
237 Trin. ix. 38 habitus demutatio, and similarly Ib. 14.
240 Trin ix. 14, concursus utriusque formae.
241 It is very characteristic that it lies outside Cyprian's vocabulary and range of ideas.
242 Trin,. ix. 38 in., and especially Ib. 39. The unity of glory departed through His obedience in the Dispensation.
243 Trin. xi. 48; cf. the end of this section and xii. 6.
244 Cf Baltzer, Christologie, p. 10f., Schwane, p. 272 f. Other explanations which have been suggested are quite inadmissible Dorner p. 407, takes the passage cited above about `substance 0' too seriously, and wavers bettween the equally impossible interpretations of `countenance 0' and `personality. 0' Forster (l.c. p. 659) understands the word to mean `mode of existence. 0' Wirthmuller, cited by Schwane, p. 273, has the courage to regard `form of God 0' and `form of a servant 0' as equivalent to Divinity and humanity.
245 Trin. xii. 6, decedere ex Deo in hominem. Perhaps it should be decidere, as in Tr. in Ps. Ixviii. 4.
247 Trin. xi. 48, `emptying Himself 0' might have been a single act; `hiding Himself within Himself 0'was a sustained course of conduct.
248 Genus is fairly common, though much rarer than natura; pars occurs in Trin. xi. 14, 15, and cf. ib'. 40. Elementa is, I think, somewhat more frequent.
249 Trin. xi. 40. Natura assumpti corporis nostri natura paterna divintatis invecta. Conversly, Trin. ix, 54, nova natura in Deum illata. But such expressions are rare; hominem ad sumpsit is the normal phrase. In Tr. in Ps. Ixviii 4, he speaks as if the two natures had been forced to coalesce by a Power higher than either. But, as we have seen. in this part of the Homily Hilary's language is destitute of theological exactness.
251 E.g. Trin. ix. Il, 39 x. 16. The expression utriusque,natura persona in Trin. ix. 14 is susceptible of another interpretation.
253 Trin. x. 22, quia totus hominis filius totus Dei filius sit.
254 Cf. Gore's Dissertation's, p. 138 f. But, Hilary, though he shares and even exaggerates the general tendency of his time, has also a strong sense of the danger of Apollinarianism
255 Homo assumptus is constantly used, and similarly homo noster for our manhood, e.g. Trin. ix. 7. This often leads to an awkwardness of which Hilary must hae been fully conscious, though he regarded it as a less evil than the use of an abstract term.
257 Tr. in Ps. ii. 11, from St. John iii. 13.
258 Trin. x. 47 f.; Tr. in Ps. cxxxviii. 3.
260 Trin. x. 24. The purpose of the Old Testament Theophanies, it will be remembered, was the same. God appeared as man, In order to make men familiar with the future reality and so more ready to believe. See Trin. V. 17.
262 Trin. ii. 26 f., iii. 18f. and often, especially in the Comm. in Matt.
266 Comm. in Matt. iii. 2; Trin. x. 45;. The freedom of Christian martyrs from pain is frequently noticed in early writers.
268 Hilary was undoubtedly influenced more than he knew by the Latin words, pati and dolere, the one purely objective, the other subjective. By a line of thought which recalls that of Mozley concerning Miracles he refuses to argue from our experience to that of Christ. That He suffered, in the sense of having wounds, and death inflicted upon Him, is a fact; that He was conscious of suffering is an inference, a supposition (putatur dolere quia patitur, Tr. in Ps. cxxxviii. 3, fallitur ergo humaneastimationis opinio putans hunc dolere quod patitur, Trin. x.47, and one which we are not entitled to make. In fact, the passage last citied states that He has no natura dolendi; so also x, 23, 35, and cf. Tr. in Ps liii. 12. Or as Hilary puts it, Trin. x. 24, He is subject to the nature passionum not to their iniurie.
275 Ib. 23. These instances of His power are used as a direct proof of Christ's incapacity of pain. Hilary is willing to confess that He could feel it, if it be shewn that we can follow Him in these respects.
279 Ib, xxxi. I-7. These were not immature speculations, abandoned by a riper judgment. The explanation of `even unto death 0' is repeated, and that concerning the cup implied, in Trin. x. 36, 37
280 Trin. x. 41. Westcott and Hort insert it within brackets. Even if the passage be retained, Hilary has an explanation which agrees with his theory.
282 loc. cit., Tr. in Ps. liii. 7
283 In Tr. in Ps. liii. 7, there is also the moral purpose. He prays humbly. His prayer expresses no need of His own, but is meant to teach us the lesson of meekness.
284 Trin. x. 45. Yet Hilary himself is not always consistent. In the purely homiletical writing of Tr. in Ps. lxviii. 1, he dwells upon Christ's endurance of pain. His argument obliged Him to emphasize the suffering; it was natural, though not logical, that he should sometimes insist also upon the feeling.
285 Harnack, Dogmengesch. ii. 30I n.
286 The words are Forster's, op. cit. p. 662, and are accepted as representing their opinion by Bardenhewer, Patrologie, p. 382, and Blaltzer, Christologie, p. 32.
287 Strom. vi. ,f 71. Bigg, Christian Platonists, p. 71, gives other sources, by which Hilary is less likely to have been influenced, from which he may have derived this teaching. This is not the only coincidence between him and Clement.
288 Trin ii. 2, in vitium vitio coarctamur alieno.
289 Tr. in Ps. Ixviii. 4. The unity is also strongly put in Trin. viii. 13 x. 6I.
290 Trin. x. 34. This was Hilary's deliberate belief. But in earlier life he had written rashly of the Holy Spirit (i.e. God the Son) surrendering His humanity to be tempted, and Of the cry upon the Cross `testifying the departure of God the Word from Him 0' (Comm. in Matt.iii, xxxiii. 6). This, if it had represented Hilary's teaching in that treatise would have proved it heretical ; but the whole tenour of the commentary proves that this was simply carelessness. In the Homilies on the Psalms he also writes somewhat loosely on occasion; e.g. liii. 4 fin., where he mentions Christ's former nature, i.e. the Divinity, and ib. 5, where he speaks of `Him Who after being God (ex Deo) had died as man. 0' But only malevolence could give an evil interpretation to these passages, delivered as they were for the edification of Hilary's flock, and with no thought of theological accuracy. It is, indeed, quite possible that they were never revised, or even intended, for publication by him.
291 E.g. Trin. ix. 6, and often in the Homilies on the Psalms, as cxxxviii. 13.
295 Trin. x. 63. Similarly in Tr. in Ps. Ixvii. 2l, he speaks of `the passion, the cross, the death, the burial of God. 0'
298 Tr. in Ps. cxli. 4. There is no evidence that the text is corrupt, though the words as they stand are rank Appololinarianism and the more significant as dating from the maturity of Hilary's thought. But here, as often, we must remember that the Homilies are familiar addresses.
299 Trin. x. 52. We must remember not only that heretical distinctions had been made, but that Christ is the name of the Son in pretemporal relation to the world (see p. Ixvii.), as well as in the world.
301 Cf. Gore, Dissertations, p. 211. It is in relation to the self emptying that Hilary uses such definite language : Trin. xi. 48, intra suam ipse vacuefactus potestatem.... Se ipsum intra se vacnefaciens Continuit; xii. 6, se evacuavit in sese.
303 Trin. ix 22, A se dividuus
305 Trin. ix. 6, 0n earth Christ is Deus and homo; in glory He is totus Deus and totus homo.
306 E.g. Discourses against the Arians, iii. 53, p.422 of the translation in this series.
307 Bp. Westcott on Cyril of Alexandria in St. John's Gospel (Speaker's Commentary), p. xcv.
308 Dorner, I. ii. 415. The liberty has been taken of putting `Himself 0' for `itself 0' On the same page Dorner speaks of `ever increasing return of the Logos into equality with Himself. 0' This is a contradiction of his own explanation. God has become God-man. He could not again become simply the Logos. The key to Hilary's position is the double nature of Christ. The Godhead and the Manhood are aspects in revelation, abstractions in argument. That which connects them and gives them reality is the one Person, the object of thought and faith.
309 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Iod, 6, cxxix. 5.
311 Isai. xlv. 12, the Old Latin, translated from the LXX., having the singular. This characteristic piece of exegesis is in Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Iod, 5; cf. ib. 7, 8.
313 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Koph, 8.
314 Ib. Ii. 16. naturam in se universa carnis adsumpsit, ib. Iiv. 9, universitatis nostrae caro' est factus ; so also Trin. xi. 16 in., and often.
315 This latter is the argument of Trin. viii. 73f.
316 Trin ii. 24; in Him there is the universi generis humani corpus because He is homo factus ex virgine.
318 Comm. in Matt. iv. 12 ; habitatio, as is often the case in late Latin with abstracts, is collective. Hilary also speaks of Christ as gerens nos, Trin x. 25, which recalls the gestans of Tertullian and the portans of Cyprian.
319 Tr. in Ps ii. 16, Ivii. 3, Ixii. 3, and often.
324 Dorner, 1. ii. 417. Dorner overlooks the birth in Baptism.
325 Tr. in Ps. ii. 27, 1iii. 14
330 Ib. 40. habens in sacramento subiectionis esse ac manere cuod non est.
331 Trin. xi. 42, incrementum glorificati in eo Dei
333 Trin. in Ps. lxii. 3; of Comm in Matt.xvi.5.
334 Tr. in. Ps. lvi. 7, liii. 5. we muat remember the importance of names in Hilary's eyes. They are not arbitrary symbols, but belong essentially to the objects which they signify. Had there been no sin, from which man needed to be saved, he would still required raising to his name and nature.
335 Ib. cxviii. , Aleph, 1, cxxx. 6.
339 Cf Harnack, Dogmengesch. ii. 281. But Harnack is unjust in saying that Had not quite made up his own mind.
340 Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, p. 206 n. `Hilary's belief in the deity of the Holy Spirit is hardly more doubtful than St. John's: yet he nowhere states it in so many words. 0'
341 If the word may be admitted for the sake of clearness. Hilary never calls the Spirit a Person.
342 §§23, 25, 30; so also ix. 69 and notably in x. 16. Similarly in Comm in Matt. iii. I, the Spirit means Christ.
343 Trin. Viii. 20, ix. 73 fin., and especially ii. 4. This last is not a reference to the Macedonian heresy, but to the logical result of Arianism.
344 T'rin. i. l7, v. I, 35, vii. 8, 31, viii. 31, 36, x. 6.&c.
345 Balzer, Theologie des hl. Hilarius, p. 51.
347 The work by Tertullian in which the doctrine of the Spirit is most fully brought out; in which, in fact, He is first expressly named God, is the Adversus Praxean. It was written after his secession from the Church, and Hilary, upon whom it had more influence than any other of Tertullian's writings, may have suspected that this teaching was the expression of his Montanism rather than a legitimate deduction from Scripture, and so have been misled by over caution. He may also have been infuenced by such Biblical passages as Rev. xiv. I, where the Spirit is unnamed.
348 E.g. Tr. in Ps. ii. l6, 1I. 23.
350 lb. cxviii., Teth, 4, Ixiv. 5.
355 E.g. ib cxviii., Aleph, 8, lii. 12. Natura infirmitalis is a favourite phrase.
356 E.g. ib. Iii. 9 cxviii., Gimel, 12,Vau, 6.
357 Ib. cxviii. Daleth, 8: cf. He, 16.
359 Ib. Ixviii. 22, based on St. Matt. x. 15.
361 E.g. ib. cxviii., Prolog. 2, Alph, 12, Phe, 8.
362 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., He 12, Nun 20. But in the former passage the perseverance also depends upon the Christian.
364 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Nun II f.
366 So also the Sin against the Holy Ghost is primarily intellectual, not ethical; Comm. Matt. v. 15, xii. 17.
368 Trin. iv. 21; Tr. in Ps. Ixvi. 2; Comm. in Matt. xviii. 6.
369 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., He, 16.
371 Ib. cxlii. 6, cxviii., Ioa, 2. In regard to the latter passage we must remember once more what importance Hilary attaches to names.
372 Comm. in Matt. sx. 24, originis nostra pecata ; Tr. in ps. cxviii, Tau, 6, scit sub peccati lege se esse natum. Other passages must be cited from quotations in St. Augustine, but Forster, p. 676, has given reason for doubting Hilary's authorship.
373 E.g. Comm, in Matt. x. 24.
374 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Vau, 4, Lamed, I; cf. Nun, 20.
375 E.g. Trin. ix. 10; Tr. in Ps. cxxix. 9.
386 E.g. Tr. in Ps. liii. 12,13 (translated in this volume) lxiv. 4.
387 Cf. Harnack, ii. 177; Schwane, ii. 271.
389 Cf. p. Ixxxv. fin. In Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Nun, 20, Hilary says `the reward of the consummation attained depends upon the initiative of the will ; 0' so also Trin. i. 11.
391 Hilary is commenting on the words, `I know, O Lord, that Thy judgments are right. 0'
393 Tr. in ps. cxviii., Iod, 12.
395 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., prolog. 4.
396 Ib. cxxxv. 3; cofessio is paraphrased by professa cognitio. Similar language is used in cxxxvii. 2 f.
397 Ib. ii. 38; cf lii. I2in., cxix. 11(4).
398 It is always confession to God directly. There is no hint of public or ceremonial confession, or of absolution. But Hilary's aabstinence from allusion to the practical system of the Church is so complete that no argurnent can ever be drawn from his silence as to the existence, or the importance in his eyes, of her instiyutions.
399 Tr. in Ps. Ixvi. 2, Ivi. 3.
405 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Gimel. 5. Hilary never mentions Confirmation.
407 E.g. ib. cxxxi. 23; Trin. viii. 13. The latter is the only passage in Hilary s writings in which the subject is discussed at length: and even here it is not introduced for its own sake.
408 E.g. Tr. in Ps. i. 9 f., cxviii., Koph, 6. Conduct in church was not more exemplary than outside. The most innocent employment which he attributes to many of his people during the reading of the lessons is the casting up of their business accounts, Tr. in Ps. cxxxv. I.
411 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Aleph, 1.
419 Tr. in Ps. cxxxvii. 16. Cf. Trin. x. 55, where he refuses to believe that it was with real sorrow that our Lord wept over Jerusalem, that godless and murdetous city. His tears were a dispensa-tion.
420 Tr. in ps. xiv. 10, est enirn necessariurn plerumque mendacium, et nonnunquam falsitas utilis est. The latter apparently refers to his second example.
421 Hermas, Mand. iii. 3, confesses to wholesale Iying; he had never heard that it was wrong. But the writer of the Shepherd does not represent his mouthpiece as a model of virtue. It is more significant that Tertullian, Pud. 19, classes breach of trust and lying among slight sins which may happen to anyone any day. This was in his strictest and most censorious period. There are grave difficulties in reconciling some of Cyprian's statements concerning his opponents with one another and with probability, but he has not ventured upon any general extenuation of the vice.
423 Ib. cxxxi. 24, cxxvii. 7, and especially cxviii., Nun, 14.
424 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Nun, 13, 15. It is in this passage that Hilary gives his views most fully. His aneithesis is between legitima and voluntaria.
425 l.c. Nun, 14, Comm. in Matt, v. 2. In the latter passage there is a piece of practical advice which shews that public fasts were generally recognised. Hilary tells his readers that they must not take literally our Lord's command to anoint themselves when they fast. If they do, they will render themselves conspicuous and ridiculous. The passage, Comm. in Matt. xxvii. 5, 6, on the parables of the Virgins with their lamps and of the Talents cannot be taken, as by Forster, as evidence that Hilary rejected the later doctrine of the supererogatory righteousness of the Saints. He is speaking of the impossibility of contemporaries conveying righteousness to one another in the present life, and his words have no bearing on that doctrine.
428 E.g. ib. lxi. 6, cxviii., He, 12, Nun, 20, Koph, 6.
431 Ib. cxviii, Lamed, 15. Similar passages are fairly numerous; e.g. Comm. in Matt. iv. 26.
433 Comm. in Matt. xii. 17, xxxi. 5.
435 Ib. ix. 8, commenting on Col. ii. 10
436 Tr. in Ps. Ii. 18, Lxiii. 9,
442 Ib. I. 19ff ., translated in volume. For the good, see also ib. lvii. 5, Trin. vi 3.
443 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Gimel, 12.
446 Trin. viii. 50; Tr. in ps. ii. 28. Cf. Lightfoot on Col. I. 15.
448 Gore, Dissertations, p. 151.
449 Schwane, ii. 271, says, `Though we reject that part of it which attributes a natural impassibility to the body of Christ, yet Hilary's exposition presents one truth more clearly than the earlier Fathers had stated it, by giving to the doctrine of the representative satisfaction of Christ its reasonable explanation as a free service of satisfaction. He conceives rightly of the Lord's whole life on earth, with all its troubles and infirmities, as a sacrifice of free love on the part of the God-Man; it is only his closer definition of this sacrifice that is inaccurate.... Hilary lays especial stress upon the freedom of the Lord s acceptance of death. 0' He quotes Trin. x. 11.
450 He had evidently been long familiar with it (Life, i. 155), but the first mention of its use for missionary purposes is in 1862 (ib. I. 137). He began the translation into Arabic at Tunis in 1890, after his resignation of the bishopric of Lahore (ii. 333), but it seems doubtfill whether he was able to make any progress with it at Muscat. His biographer says nothing of the amount actually accomplished.
451 For Bishop French's view of the importance of this doctrine, see his Life, I. 84.
452 Compare Bishop Lightfoot' comprehensive words on Col. I. 20 The reconciliation of mankind implies `a restitution to a state from which they had fallen, or for which they were destined. 0'
2 Hosius, bishop of Cordova in Spain, had been sent by Constantine to Alexandria at the outbreak of the Arian controversy. He had presided at the Council of Nicaea in 325, and had taken part in the Council of Sardinica in 343, when the Nicene Creed was reaffirmed. In his extreme old age he was forced with blows to accept this extreme Arian Creed drawn up at the third Council of Sirmium in the summer of 357. This is what is stated by Socrates, and it is corroborated by Athanasius, Hist. Arian, c. 45, where it is added that he anathematized Arianism before dying. Hilary certainly does Hosius an injustice in deeclaring him to be joint-author of the `blasphemous 0' creed.
17 Substantia is in this passage used as the equivalent of Person. The word was used by Tertullian in the sense of oujsiva, and this early Latin use of the word is the use which eventually prevailed. The meaning of the word in Hilary is influenced by its philological equivalent in Greek. At the beginning of the fourth century uJpovstasi" was used in the same sense as oujsiva. The latter word meant `reality, 0' the former word `the basis of existence. 0' Athanasius, however, began the practice of restricting uJpovstasi" to the divine Persons. Hilary consequently here uses substantia in this new sense of the word u'povstasi". The Alexandrine Council of 362 sanctioned as allowable the use of in the sense of Person, and by the end of the century the old usage practically disappeared.
18 The Council at Antioch of 341, generally known as the Dedicaiton Council, assembled for the dedicaiton of the great cathedral church which had been commenced there by the imperor Constantine, who did not live to see its completion. Four creeds were then drawn up, if we reckon a document which was drawn up at Antioch by a continuation of the Council in the following year. The second, and most important, of these creeds became the creed of the Semi-Nicene party. Capable of a wholly orthodox interpretation, it was insufficient ofitself to repel Arianism, but not insufficient to be used as an auxiliary means of opposing it. Hilary throughout ssumes that it is not to be interpreted in an Arian sense, and uses it as an intrduction to Nicene theology.
19 Lamb is Hilary's mistake for Man. He doubtless read the original in a Greek manuscript which had the word written in its abbreviated form , lamb. The Latin word used by Hilary as a substitute for Apostle is , for which word it seems impossible to account.
22 Mount Haemus is the mountain range which at this period formed the boundary between the provinces of Thracia and Moesia Inferior. Haeminontus was grouped with Moesia Inferior under the Vicarius of Thrace.
28 The flesh, without ceasin to be truly flesh, is represented as becoming divine like the Word. That is, the humanity becomes so endowed with power, and knowledge, and hoiness through the unction of the Holy Ghost that its natural properties are "deified." These and similar phrases are freely used byt the Fathers of the fourth century, and may be compared with John I. 14, and 2 Pet. I. 4.
29 Passibility may not be affirmed of the dive nature of Christ which is incapable of any change or limitation within itself. At the same time the Word may be said to have suffered inasmuch as the suffering affected the flesh which He assummed. This subject was afterwards, carefullly developed by St. John of Damascus , III. 4. In c 79, Hilary criticises the Arian statement that the Son "jointly suffered," a word which meant that the divine nature of the Son shared in the sufferings which were endured by His jumanity. this phrase, like the statement of Arius that the Logos was "capable of change" implied that the Son only possessed a secondary divinity.
37 Eleusius is criticised by Socrates II. 40, for disliking any attempt at a repudiation of the "Dedication" creed of 341, although the "Dedication" creed was little better than a repudiation of the Nicene creed. He was, in fact, a semi-Arian. But his vigorous opposition to the extreme form of Arianism and the hopefulness with which Hilary always regarded the semi-Arians, here invest him with a reputation for the "true knowledge of God." In 381 he refused to accept the Nicene creed or take part in the Council of Constantinople.
44 Propricias, or sharing one's own. the word proprietas is not here used in a technical sense. In its technical sense proprietas or signifies the special property of each Person on the Godhead, and the owrd is used to secure the distinctions of the three Persons and exclude any Sabellian misunderstanding.
48 Impiare se is used by Plautus, Rua. 1, 3, 8, in the sense of . the sentence probably refers to the misuse of the word by Paul of Samosata.
54 Mehtuselah's age was a favourite problem with the early Church. See Aug. de Civ. Dei, xv. 13, and de pexx. orig. ii. 23, where it is said to be one of those points on which a Christian can afford to be ignorant. According to the septuagint, Methuselah lived for fourteen years after the deluge, so that more than `eitht souls 0'' survived, and 1 Pet. iii. 20 appreared to be incorrect. According to the Hebrew and Vullgate there is not difficulty, as Methuselah is represented as dying before the deluge.
4 Reading mens finita and naturae finitatim for the infinita and infinitatem of the Benedictine Edition.
5 Ps. cxxxviii. (cxxxix.) 7-10.
7 Cf. Hilary's explanation of this passsage in Book ii. §§ 19, 20.
10 xxiii. 22, according to the LXX., .
13 The letter of Arius to Alexander; Book iv., §§ 12, 13.
14 Acts iv. 32: in this and the following passages unum is read.
30 Reading nativitas et nomen. The clause above, which is bracketed in Magne, appears to be gloss.
46 Prov. viii. 22, according to the LXX.
47 Here, as often in early writers, the Sapiential books are included under this name.
4 Reading a se, instead of alter.
5 This is merely a verbal paradox, to illustrate the inadequancy of language to treat of of God. God is ex hypothesi author of all things, and contains all things in Himself. But the negative term `immortal 0' excludes death, and its concomitant of disease, pain, & c., from God's sphere.
6 St. Matt. iii. 17; xvii. 5. Again in § 23 Hilary says that these words were often repeated.
11 Ib. xvii. 10. the words which follow, "and Whatsoever the Father hath He Hath given to the Son," printed in the editions as a Scriptural citation, are evidently a gloss which has crept into the tect. The words do not occure in Scripture, but are used by Hilary in § 10 of this Book.
20 The citation which is interpolated in § 8, where see the note, and cf. St.Matt. xi. 25.
27 The healing of the blind man, St. John ix. 1 ff., is treated as a special case distinct from more ordinary cases of blindness.
30 I.e. how to reconcile the Unity of God with the Divinity of Christ. To say that the Word is God might seem to contradict the Unity by asserting the existence of a second God.
31 Reading a cognitione temportis.
40 Col. ii. 9. the argument of §§ 28-20 is not easy. They begin with the possible objection to All things made through Him, that this would include the Father among the Son's creations. The answer is found in the following words, Without Him was not anything made. These show that the Son was not alone in His work; the Father is co-existent. But they raise another difficulty. What if the Father were the sole agent in creation, the Son only His inseparable Companion, yet taking no share in the work? The answer is found in the preceding words, All things were made through Him, amplified and explained by St. Paul when He says that it was through Him and in Him. In Him, because when the Son, the future Creator, was born, the world was potentially created; in Him also because He is Life, and thus the condition of all existence. Again, the truth of the words, All things were made through Him, is shewn by the manner of His birth. It was instantaneous, and He was born endowed with all His powers. We may say therefore that He was the author of His own existence; All things were made through Him, with the necessary exception of the Father.
44 St. Matt. xvii. 5. See the note to § 8.
62 qui Patre et filio auctoribus confitendus est; A comparison with dum et usum et auctorem eius ingnorant in § 4 makes this appear the probable translation. It might, of course, mean confess Him on the evidence of Father and Son.
79 1 Cor. ii. 12, cited in § 29.
12 This is an argument against the objection that God, if Christ is His Son, must have suffered loss. If God is His Father and the sole source of His existence, Christ must have come into being by separation from the Father; i.e. the Father must have suffered diminution and lost His completeness. The answer is that a woman-and a fortiori the Virgin, who was the only human parent Christ-suffers no loss of bolily completeness through becoming a mother. There is no allusion to the belief in the perpetual virginity of the Mother of our Lord.
20 Substitutio; this word seems, except in technical senses of the law, to be very late and very rare. The only meaning, and that one ont attested in the dictionaries, which will suit this passage, seems to be that of the jackdaw dressed in peacock's feathers.
8 Omitting solus innascibilis et, which are out of place here.
21 Ps. cxxxix. 6-9 (cxxxviii. 7-10).
34 This Epistle of Arius to Alexander is translated substantially as in Newman's Arians of the Fourth Century, ch. 11., § 5, though there are differences of some importance between Hilary's Latin version and the Greek in Athanasius de Synodis, § 16, from which Newman's version is made.