Kirche.")]
[Footnote 236: The distinction of sins committed against God himself, as
we find it in Tertullian, Cyprian, and other Fathers, remains involved
in an obscurity that I cannot clear up.]
[Footnote 237: Cyprian never expelled any one from the Church, unless he
had attacked the authority of the bishops, and thus in the opinion of
this Father placed himself outside her pale by his own act.]
[Footnote 238: Hippol., Philos. IX. 12: [Greek: Kai parabolen ton
zizanion pros touto ephe ho Kallistos legesthai. Aphete ta zizania
sunauxein to sito, toutestin en te ekklesia tous hamartanontas. Alla kai
ten kiboton tou Noe eis homoioma ekklesias ephe gegonenai, en he kai
kunes kai lykoi kai korakes kai panta ta kathara kai akatharta; houto
phaskon dein einai en ekklesia homoios, kai hosa pros touto dynatos en
synagein houtos hermeneusen.] From Tertull., de idolol. 24, one cannot
help assuming that even before the year 200 the laxer sort in Carthage
had already appealed to the Ark. ("Viderimus si secundum arcae typum et
corvus et milvus et lupus et canis et serpens in ecclesia erit. Certe
idololatres in arcae typo non habetur. Quod in arca non fuit, in ecclesia
non sit"). But we do not know what form this took and what inferences
they drew. Moreover, we have here a very instructive example of the
multitudinous difficulties in which the Fathers were involved by
typology: the Ark is the Church, hence the dogs and snakes are men. To
solve these problems it required an abnormal degree of acuteness and
wit, especially as each solution always started fresh questions. Orig.
(Hom. II. in Genes. III.) also viewed the Ark as the type of the Church
(the working out of the image in Hom. I. in Ezech., Lomm. XIV. p. 24
sq., is instructive); but apparently in the wild animals he rather sees
the simple Christians who are not yet sufficiently trained--at any rate
he does not refer to the whoremongers and adulterers who must be
tolerated in the Church. The Roman bishop Stephen again, positively
insisted on Calixtus' conception of the Church, whereas Cornelius
followed Cyprian (see Euseb., H. E. VI. 43. 10), who never declared
sinners to be a necessary part of the Church in the same fashion as
Calixtus did. (See the following note and Cyp., epp. 67. 6; 68. 5).]
[Footnote 239: Philos., l.c.: [Greek: Kallistos edogmatisen hopos ei
episkopos hamartoi ti, ei kai pros thanaton, me dein katatithesthai].
That Hippolytus is not exaggerating here
|