FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286  
287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   >>   >|  
igin or not,' Compl. Ed. II. p. 323]. A few pages after (p. 332), I find the work of Irenaeus, _de Ogdoade_, cited instead of the _Epistle to Florinus_, for the relations between Irenaeus and Polycarp. [This error is likewise tacitly corrected in the Compl. Ed. II. p. 330.] It might have been supposed that any one who had looked into the subject at all must have been aware that this _locus classicus_ was in the _Epistle to Florinus_. But Eusebius happens to quote the treatise _de Ogdoade_ in the same chapter; and hence the mistake. Such errors survive, though these pages have undergone at least two special revisions, and though this 'sixth' edition is declared on the title page to be 'carefully revised.' [195:1] _S.R._ II. p. 333 (334). [195:2] _S.R._ II. p. 329 (330). [196:1] Iren. _Haer._ iv. 27. 1 sq; iv. 30. 1; iv. 31. 1; iv. 32. 1. Even in this case there remains the possibility that we have a report of lectures taken down at the time. The early work of Hippolytus on Heresies was drawn up from a synopsis which he had made of the lectures of Irenaeus (Photius _Bibl._ 12 1). Galen again speaks of his pupils taking down his lectures as he delivered them (_Op._ xix. p. 11, ed. Kuehn). The discourses which Irenaeus reports from the lips of this anonymous elder (perhaps Melito or Pothinus) are so long and elaborate, that the hypothesis of lecture notes seems almost to be required to account for them. [197:1] See above, p. 143. [197:2] See above, p. 158 sq. [198:1] See above, p. 158. [198:2] Iren. _Haer._ v. 6. 1. [199:1] _S.R._ II. p. 333. [199:2] See above, p. 143. [200:1] [See above, p. 154.] [200:2] _Patrol. Graec._ lxxxix. p. 962 (ed. Migne). [200:3] Under this 'spiritual' interpretation, Anastasius includes views as wide apart as those of Philo, who interprets paradise as a philosophical allegory, and Irenaeus, who regards it as a supramundane abode; for both are named. But they have this in common, that they are both opposed to a terrestrial region; and this is obviously the main point which he has in view. [201:1] _Patrol. Graec._ lxxxix. p. 964 sq. [201:2] Cramer _Catena_ p. 358 sq. [201:3] Routh (_Rel. Sacr._ I. p. 41) would end the quotation from Papias at 'their array came to nought;' but the concluding sentence seems to be required as part of the quotation, which otherwise would be very meaningless. Papias, adopting the words of the Apocalypse, emphasizes the fact that Sata
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286  
287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Irenaeus

 

lectures

 

Patrol

 

required

 
lxxxix
 

Ogdoade

 

Florinus

 
Epistle
 

quotation

 
Papias

concluding

 
nought
 

sentence

 

adopting

 
Pothinus
 

Melito

 

anonymous

 

elaborate

 

hypothesis

 

account


Apocalypse

 

lecture

 

emphasizes

 
meaningless
 

Catena

 

supramundane

 
allegory
 

common

 

opposed

 

Cramer


terrestrial

 

region

 

philosophical

 

paradise

 
interpretation
 

Anastasius

 
includes
 

spiritual

 

interprets

 
Hippolytus

classicus

 

Eusebius

 
looked
 

subject

 
treatise
 

survive

 
undergone
 
errors
 

chapter

 
mistake