ship; as has been often observed by learned men of late times. And, I pray, why is this reserve enjoined, with regard to the Constitutions only? Are there no mysteries in any other books here mentioned? And are there not in the Constitutions many directions given to the laity, and to all men in general ? Are they not at the beginning inscribed to all who from among the .Gentiles have believed in Jesus Christ ?' There must have been some particular reason for this caution. And possibly this may be as probable a reason as any that the composer of this canon, who was either the author, or at least a great favourer of the Constitutions, being conscious of their novelty, inserted this caution with a view to evade, or weaken, the argument against their genuineness and authority, taken from the silence of antiquity about them. I place at the bottom of the page an observation of Abp. Usher to the like purpose.

Upon the whole, I think, these observations demonstrate the late date of this canon, and that it had not a being in the first three centuries, or for some time after. Consequently it deserves not the regard of Christians now, who are willing to be determined by evidence.



' RuETICIUS," di Reticius, bishop of Autun,' says Jerom, • was a man of great note in Gaul, in

the time of the emperor Constantine. There are extant his Commentaries upon the Canticles, • and another large work against the Novatians. Nor have I met with any other writings of his.

2. Rheticius was mentioned by us formerly, in the history of the Donatists. He was one, of the Gallican bishops appointed by Constantine to hear Ca'cilian and them, in a council at Rome in 313. He was also present at the council of Arles, relating to the same cause, in 314.

3.-Rheticius's Commentary upon the Canticles is mentioned by Jerom in some of his letters., I shall place a part of what he says below. He owns, that there was somewhat agreeable in the style; but says, the work was of little use for assisting men to understand the sacred author. He mentions some trifling thoughts: and blames Rheticius for not having first consulted Origen, and other interpreters, before he attempted to write a commentary himself.

4. Rheticius is mentioned by Augustine in his writings against the Pelagians. He speaks &

• Ita enim bipedum nequissimus, qui Clementis personam sum, virum eloquentem, præter ineptias sensuum cæterorum, (quinto post excessum ipsius sæculo) induit, Constitutionibus Tharsis urbem putâsse Tarsum, in quâ Paulus apostolus natus å seipso interpolatis, et in aliam pene speciem transformatis, sit. Innumerabilia sunt, quæ in illius mihi Commentacanonicam auctoritatem conciliare conatus est: eâ tamen ad riis sordere visa sunt. Est quidem sermo compositus, et Gal. mysterium iniquitatis suæ celandum cautione adhibitâ, ut eas licano cothurno fluens. Sed quid ad interpretem, cujus pronullo modo divulgandas præciperet. Ex quibus et Albas- fessio est, non quo ipse disertus appareat, sed quo eum, qui pinæus (Obs. I. i. c. 13.) recte observavit, Constitutiones hasce lecturus est, sic faciat intelligere, quomodo ipse intellexit qui printis seculis factas non esse; cum primi secoli Christiani sua scripsit? Rogo, non habuerat Origenis volumina ? non inter-, lubentes mysteria, ut vel ex Justino constat, enuntiarent. pretes cæteros ? non certe aliquos necessarios Hebræorun), ut Usser. Proleg. seu Diss. Ignat. cap. vi. fin.

aut interrogaret, aut legeret, quid sibi vellent quæ ignorabat? 6 Rheticius, Æduorum, id est, Augustodunensis Episcopus, Sed tain male videtur existimasse de cæteris, ut nemo possit sub Constantino celeberrimæ famæ habitus est in Galliis. de ejus erroribus judicare. Frustra ergo a me ejusdero viri Leguntur ejus Commentarii in Cantica Canticorum, et aliud Commentarios postulas, quum mihi in illis displiceant multo grande volumen adversus Novatianum. Nec præter hæc plura, quam placeant. &c. Ad Marcell. Ep. 133. al. ep. 10. quidquam ejus operum reperi. De V. I. cap. 82.

inter criticas. T. ii. p. 662. 621. See p. 297

& Rheticium ab Augustoduno episcopum magnæ auctorita-, d Vid. Euseb. H. E. 1. 8. c. 5. p. 39. et Optat. 1. i. c. 13. tis in ecclesiâ tempore episcopatus sui, gesta illa ecclesiastica

e Ob hoc et ego obsecro, et tu ut petas plurimum quæso, nobis indicant, quando in urbe Roma, Melchiade apostolice ut tibi beati Rheticii Augustodunensis episcopi Commentarios sedis episcopo præsidente, cum aliis judex interfuit, Donatumad describendum largiatur, in quibus Canticum Canticorum que damnavit, qui prior auctor Donatistarum schismatis fuit, sublimi ore disseruit. Ad Florent. ep. 4. al. 6. T. iv. p. 6. in. & Cæcilianum episcopuin ecclesiæ Carthaginensis absolvit. Is

i Nuper quum Rheticii Augustodunensis episcopi, qui cum de baptismo ageret; ita locutus est : Hanc igitur prinquondam a Constantino imperatore sub Silvestro episcopo ob cipalem esse in ecclesiá indulgentiam, neminem præteriit, in causam Montensium missus est Romam, Coinmentarios in quà antiqui criminis omne pondus exponimus, et ignorantia Canticum Canticorum perlegissem, vehementer miratus • nostræ facinora prisca delemus, ubi et vetcrem hominem VOL. H.


of him, as a man of great repute in his time, and has twice quoted a passage of his concerning baptism, as favouring the doctrine of original sin. But it does not appear whence that passage is taken; whether from one of the books mentioned by Jerom, or from some other work, or from the debates in one of the councils above taken notice of.

5. I have thought it best to give some account of this eminent bishop and commentator, who flourished at the beginning of the fourth century, though his writings are not now extant. And I refer my readers to some learned moderns, whom they may consult, if they think fit.




1. TRIPHYLLIUS bishop of a city in Cyprus about the year 340, and afterwards, was a man of great repute for eloquence in the time of the emperor Constantius, as we learn from Jerom, whose article I place at length below. He assures us that Triphyllius wrote a Commentary upon the Canticles, which he had read, and divers other works, which he had not met with. Triphyllius is likewise placed by Jerom among other eminent Christian writers in his letter to

2. Suidas in his Lexicon says: • Triphyllius, a bishop, and disciple of Spyridion of Cyprus, • who wrought many miracles, wrote an account of our holy father Spyridion. It is not unlikely, that this may be one of the many works of Triphyllius, which Jerom had not met with.

3. Sozomen relates divers things of Spyridion, or Spyridon, which are not very easy to be credited. One story however may be true enough; it is to this purpose. There being upon some occasion a synod of the bishops of Cyprus, Spyridion and Triphyllius were present. Triphyllius had studied the Roman laws at Berytus for a considerable time, and was in repute likewise for his skill in other parts of learning. At an assembly for divine worship, Triphyllius was called upon to preach; and when he alleged that text (Mark ii. 9.] “ Arise, take up thy bed,” or couch, " and walk:" instead of the popular word in the evangelist, he made use of another Greek word, reckoned more elegant: at which Spyridion being much offended, rose up from his seat, and before all the people said aloud, Are you better than he who said couch, that you are • ashamed to use his expressions ?

4. If this be true, we have an argument of the virtue, particularly of the humility of Triphyllius, in that work of his where he celebrated Spyridion and his miracles. The public reproof which he had received, produced no lasting resentment in his mind; he still honoured his master : he was therefore both a learned and a good man, though, as it seems, too credulous.

cum ingenitis sceleribus exuimus.' Audis ' antiqui criminis Triphyllius, Cypri Ledrensis, sive Leucotheon, episcopus, pondus. Audis ' prisca facinora.' Audis 'cum sceleribus eloquentissimus suæ ætatis

, et sub rege Constantio celeberriingenitis hominem veterem.' Et audes adversus hæc ruino- mus fuit. Legi ejus in Cantica Canticorum commentarios. sam construere novitatem? Contr. Julian. Pelagian. 1. i. cap. At multa alia composuisse fertur, quæ in nostras manus miniiii. n. 7. T. 10. P. i.

me pervenerunt. De Vir. Ill. cap. 92. Si vis agnoscere vetustatem, ex quâ parvuli Christiana Exstant et-libri-et Triphyllii Cyprii

. Ep. 83. T. iv. gratiâ renovatur, audi fideliter quod ait homo Dei Rheticius

p. 656.

• V. Τριφυλλιος. ab Augustoduno episcopus, qui cum Melchiade Romano epis

και Τριφυλλιον τον Λεδρων επισκοπον ανδρα αλλως τε copo quondam judex sedit, Donatumque damnavit hereticum. ελλοθιμον, και δια νομων ασκησιν πολυν" χρονον εν τη βερυλιων Hic enim, cum de Christiano baptismate loqueretur, ' Hanc πολει διαίριψανία. Συναξεως δε επιλελεμενης, επιτραπεις Τρίigitur,' inquit, principalem esse in ecclesiâ indulgentiam.'- φυλλιος διδαξαι το πλήθος, επει το ρηταν εκεινο παραξειν εις Audisne, non postea perpetrata, sed etiam ingenita scelera μεσον εδεησε, το αρον σε τον κρατζαίον, και περιπαθει, σκιμveteris hominis ? Numquid Manichæus fuit iste Rheticius ? ποδα αντι το κρατζαίο, μεθαζαλων το ονομα, ειπε. Και ο ΣπυOp. Imperf. 1. i. cap. cv. T. 10. P. 2.

ριδιων α/ανακλησας, και συνε, εφη, αμεινων τε κραταιον ειρηχοτος, Vid. Cav. H.L. T. i. p. 173. Fabr. ad Hieron. de V. I. ότι ταις αυθε λέξεσιν επαισχυνη κεχρησθαι; τετο ειπων, απεπηcap. 82. Du Pin Bib. T. ii. p. 26. Tillem. Mem. Ec. T. vi. Srce to ispalino Spove, te ir jie opwrlos, xo do Sozom. 1. i. C. Les Donatistes. Art. 12.

11. p. 416, 417. • Vid. Cav. H.L. T. i. p. 206. Fabr. Bib. Ec. ad Hieron, de V. I. cap. 92.


5. Rufinus · supposes Spyridion to have been present at the council of Nice: and tells divers strange stories of him, which Socrates transcribed into his Ecclesiastical History.

They who desire to know more of Spyridion, may consult · Tillemont.



year 340.

1. As Jerom has a chapter for Fortunatianus, I transcribe it below. He was born in Africa, but was bishop of Aquileia in Italy. In the reign of Constantius he wrote short commentaries or notes upon the gospels in a homely style. Fortunatianus is placed by Cave · at the

2. Though Jerom there speaks of Fortunatianus's commentaries as brief and rustic, he did not entirely neglect them. In a letter to Paul of Concordia, still extant, he intreats him 'to send him those commentaries; and in the preface to his own commentary upon St. Matthew, he aeknowledges, that she had read what Fortunatianus had written upon that gospel.

[blocks in formation]

I. His history. II. Principles. III. Writings. IV. Character. V. Scriptures received by him.

VI. His sect subsisted for some time.

1. Photius of Galatia,' says " Jerom, disciple of Marcellus, and bishop of Sirmium, endea• voured to revive the heresy of Ebion. Being afterwards banished by the emperor Valentinian, * he wrote many volumes; among which, the chief are his books against the Gentiles, and to Valentinian.'

Photinus was a native of Galatia, as Jerom intimates, and probably of Ancyra, the chief city. The same is intimated by others. Jerom here, and Sulpicius Severus, and others, call him disciple of Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra, of whom we have spoken “ formerly. He " is also said to have been deacon to Marcellus.

[ocr errors]

• Ex eorum numero (et si quid adhuc eminentius) fuisse 1 Photinus de Gallogræcià, Marcelli discipulus, Sirmi epis. dicitur etiam Spyridion Cyprius episcopus, vir unus ex ordine copus ordinatus, Hebionis hæresim instaurare conatus est. prophetarum: quantum etiam nos eorum, qui eum viderunt, Postea a Valentiniano principe pulsus ecclesiâ plura scripsit relatione comperimus, &c. Rufin. H. E. 1. i. cap. 5.

volumina: in quibus vel præcipua sunt contra Gentes, et ad Socr. l. i. c. 12. • Mem. Ec. T. vii.

Valentinianum libri. De Vir. Il. cap. 107. d Fortunatianus, natione Afer, Aquileiensis episcopus, im

γενος της μικρας Γαλαθιας. Socr. 1. ii. c. 18. p. perante Constantio, in Evangelia, titulis ordinatis, brevi et rus

96. D. tico sermone scripsit commentarios. E: in hoc habetur detes- Οι απο Μαρκελλα και Φωτεινε ακυροδαλαίων. Αp. eund: tabilis, quod Liberium Romanæ Urbis episcopum, pro fide ad cap. 19. p. 99. B. exilium pergentem, primus solicitavit ac fregit,'et ad subscrip- * Et tamen hoc ipsum Marcellum gravabat, quia Photinus tionem hæreseos compulit. De V. I. cap. 97. Vid. Fabr. in auditor ejus fuisse in adolescentiâ videbatur. Sulp. Sev. Hist. h. I. et conf. Tillemont. Mem. T. vi. Les Ariens. art. 51, et Socr. 1. ii. c. 36. 69. · H. L. T. i. p. 206.

Μαρκελλα τε τα καθηρημενα μαθητης, ακολυθων τα f Et ne putes modica esse quæ deprecor- -scilicet Com Sidaoxanw, . 2. Socr. l. c. 18. p. 96. D. mentarios Fortunatiani-Ad Paul. Concord. ep. 10. al. 21. T. m See p. 395. iv. p. 17. in.

n Photinus Sirmiensis episcopus fuit a Marcello imbutus. & Legisse me fateor in Matthæum-et Latinorum, Hilarii, Nam et diaconus sub eo aliquamdiu fuit. Hilar: Fragments Victorini Fortunatiani opuscula. Prolog. in Matt. T. iv. ii. n. 19. p. 1275.

The time when Photinus was ordained bishop of Sirmium, is not exactly known; nor when he first began to publish his peculiar principles, whether in 341, or 343: but he was first condemned by the Arians or Eusebians - in a synod held at Antioch in 344, or 345. He was afterwards condemned in several councils. But it was not easy to remove him, because of the affection which the people of Sirmium had for him, who would not part with him. In the end he was condemned and deposed in a council at Sirmium, held in 351, as is now generally supposed: after which he was banished. There being some difficulties about the time of the just-mentioned council, and other councils relating to Photinus, which for the sake of brevity I do not choose to concern myself with; I refer to several learned moderns, who have written his history, in which there are divers intricacies.

Jerom says, that Photinus was banished by Valentinian; which creates a difficulty: for the council of Sirmium, by which Photinus was deposed, and after which he was banished, was held in the time of Constantius, who died in 361, whereas Valentinian did not begin to reign before 364. Some " therefore have thought, that what Jerom says here is a slip of memory, or mistake through haste, putting Valentinian for Constantius. Others account for it in this manner; Photinus, they suppose, must have been restored by the edict of Julian, together with other bishops banished in the reign of Constantius; and Photinus was banished a second time, in the time of Valentinian, if Jerom is not mistaken. And indeed, there is in Facundus ' a letter of Julian to Photinus, if it be genuine; and it is very complaisant.

It is concluded from Jerom's 8 Chronicle, that Photinus died in 375 or 376. He seems to have been living, when Epiphanius wrote the article of his heresy in 375. Optatus · who wrote about 368, may be understood to speak of him as then living.

Whenever that council of Sirmium was held, by which Photinus was deposed and banished, there was a conference held concerning his doctrine, at his request. The principal disputant on the other side was Basil the Arian bishop of Ancyra, who had been put in the room of Marcellus: and it is said, that Basil triumphed in the argument. The disputation was taken down by notaries appointed for that purpose; and there were several copies made of it, one to be sent to the emperor Constantius, another for the synod, and a third for the courtiers that were present, and before whom the conference was held by the emperor's order. But there is nothing of it remaining: if it had been still extant, in all probability it would have appeared curious to some in our times.

Socrates says, that after Photinus had been deposed, the bishops offered to restore him if he would recant: but he refused. Sozomen "speaks to the like purpose. And perhaps Philaster refers to this, in a place to be taken notice of by and by: where he says, that Photinus refused to subscribe the creed which the synod had composed.

Germinius, an Arian, often mentioned by Athanasius, and the ecclesiastical historians, was successor of Photinus.

II. Accounts of Photinus's principles may be seen in many authors, particularly in the Symbol of the Eusebian council at Antioch, where he was first condemned. They" join him and

a Vid. Athanas. de Synod. n. vi. vii. et conf. Socrat. I. ii. e Vid. Fabr. ad Hieron. de V. I. cap. 107. et ad Philastr. cap. 18, 19. Verum inter hæc Sirmium convenitur Photinus hæreticus Vid. Facund. I. iv. cap. 2. p. 59.

& Chr. p. 187. comprehensus, olim reus pronuntiatus, et a communione jam- h Vid. H. 71. n. i. et Indic. Hæres. p. 808. pridem unitatis abscissus, nec tum quidem per factionem i Dictum est hoc de Photino præsentis temporis hæretico, populi potuit amoveri. Hilar. Fragm. ii. n. 21. p. 1299. qui Filium Dei ausus est dicere tantummodo hominem fuisse, Vid. et n. 22.

non Deum. Optat. I. iv. c. 5. c Vid. Cav. H. L. Ann. 344. T. i. p. 209, and Life of St. k Vid. Epiph. H. 71. n. i. p. 829. Socrat. I. ii. cap. 29, et Athanasius, n. xi. p. 127-129. in Lives of the Fathers of the 30. Sozom. I. iv. cap. fourth century. Du Pin. Bib. T. ii. p. 112.. Tillem. Mem. 1Τελοις τον Φωτεινον και μεθα καθαιρεσιν συνεσθαι και συνυT. vi. Les Ariens. Art. 37. 41. 44. 46, 47. Fabr. Bib. Gr. πουραψαι συμπειθειν επειρων7ο, επαγλειλαμενοι αποδιωσεις αυλω T. viii. p. 314. et seq. T. xi. p. 378. not. Petav. Diss, de την επισκοπην, εαν εκ μετανοίας αναθεμαλιση μεν το παρευρεθεν Photin. Damnat. ap. Labb. Concil. T. ii. p. 279. &c. et Ani- αυτω δούμα, συνθηται δε τη αυλων γνωμη. Socr. 1. ii. c. 30. madvers. in Epiphan. H. 73. p. 304, &c. Tho. Ittigii His

cap. 65.

[ocr errors]


m Soz: 1. iv. c. 6. p. 543, toria Photini in App. ad librum de Hæresiarchis. Diss. M. » Τοιείοι δε εισιν οι απο Μαρκελλο, και Φωτεινο των ΑλίκυροLarrogue de Photino hæretico, ejusque multiplici damnatione. Γαλαΐων, οι την προαιωνιον υπαρξιν τα Χριςο, και την θεοληλα, Baron. Ann. 357. n. i. et seqq. Pagi Ann. 344, 345. 347. n. και την αλελεύληλον αυτ8 βασιλειαν ομοιως Ιεδαιοις αθεΐασιν, επι V. viii. xv. 349. n. vi. vii. 331n. X. xi. et seqq. Basnag. Ann. προφασει το συνισασθαι δοκειν τη μοναρχία. Ισμεν γαρ αυτου 345. n. v. 349. n. viii. 351. n. vi. viii. Athanas. Vit. a Bene- ημεις εχ απλως λούον προφορικον, η ενδιαθεΐον τε Θερ, αλλα dict. adornat ad Ann. Chr. 343. 347, 349. 351.

ζωνία Θεον λοίον καθ' εαυθον υπαρχονία, και Υιον Θεό και Χριςον. • Vid. Petay. Animadv. ad Epiph. H. 71. p. 301.

p. 125. D.


Marcellus together, as denying the divinity and eternal pre-existence of the Son, and the personality of the Word, under a pretence of maintaining the divine Unity.

Philaster says little more of Photinus, than that he held the same opinion with Paul of Samosata, and that he would not renounce it: for which reason he was deposed, and excluded from the church of Sirmium, by the bishops who had convicted him.

Epiphanius, in his Summary, says, that Photinus was of the same opinion with Paul of Samosata; though in some respects he expressed himself differently. But both agreed, that Christ began to exist when he was born of Mary. In like manner, in his fuller account: that he was not from eternity, but he was born of Mary, and the Holy Ghost came upon him : that he was born of the Holy Ghost and Mary, and on that account was the Son of God.

Socrates says, that Photinus, bishop of Sirmium, native of Galatia, following his master Marcellus who had been deposed, maintained, that Christ was a mere man: and that the bishops assembled at Sirmium deposed him, having found that he held the doctrine of Sabellius of Lybia, and Paul of Samosata.

Sozomen's account is, that' Photinus taught, there is one God Almighty, who by his own word made all things: that he did not allow the eternal generation and subsistence of the Son, but said that the Christ began to be, when he was born of Mary. He 3 was deposed, as holding the doctrine of Sabellius, and Paul of Samosata.

Theodoret does little more than say, that “ Photinus held the same doctrine with Sabellius, except that he set it forth in a somewhat different manner; and that he was confuted by Diodorus of Tarsus in Cilicia. To which i there may be reckoned to be a reference in the letter ascribed to the emperor Julian, as preserved in Facundus.

Photinus is in Augustine's k book of Heresies; but I do not think it needful to transcribe him. However, in other places also he mentions the Photinians, and shews their sentiment. They said, that' Christ was a man, and a great prophet, and excelled all men, the best and most knowing, in wisdom and holiness; but he was not God. They said, that the Father only is God, and Christ a man: and they denied the personality of the Spirit.

Sulpicius Severus was quoted before. I transcribe another passage in the margin.

Vincent's account is as well expressed as most ; I put it belowo at length. • Photinus holds • the unity of God after the Jewish manner. He allows not of any Trinity of persons. He says, • that Christ was a man born of Mary. He denies the personality of the Word, and the Spirit. • There is only one God the Father, and Jesus Christ, whom we ought to serve.'

Marius Mercator supposes Photinus to have taught, that P Jesus was born of Joseph and Mary, after the manner of other men. But that is contrary to what is said by others, particu%. 1. Apud Athanas. De Synod. p. 740. n. vi. Vid. et n. vii. autem Nazaræi magusacutus apparuit Sophista religionis Et apnd Socrat. H. E. I. ii. c. 19. p. 99.

agrestis. Ap. Facund. I. iv. c. 2. p. 50. a Photinus doctrinam ejus secutus in omnibus similiter præ- к Сар. 45. dicabat. Inque hoc mendacio perseverans, projectus est de I Quam multi dicunt, homo fuit magnus ? Quam multi diecclesià. Sirmiensium civitatis, a sanctis episcopis superatus. cunt, propheta fuit? Quam molti antichristi, ut Photinus, Philast. cap. 65. p. 128. ed. Fabric.

homo fuit, plus nihil habuit : sed omnes homines pios et Και αυλοι και απο Μαριας και δευρο τον Χρισον διαζε. sanctos excellentià sapientiæ et justitiæ superavit. Serm. 246. Calelar. Indict. p. 808.

n. 4. T. v. • Φασκει δε έλος, απασχης τον Χριςον μη ειναι, απο δε Μα- in · Photiniani quoque Pairem solum esse dicentes Deum, ριας και δευρο αυθον υπαρχειν, εξοθε, φησι, το πνευμα το αιον Filium vero nonnisi hominem, negant omnino esse tertiam επηλθεν επ' αυτον, και εξεννηθη εκ πνευματος αιο. Η. 71. η. 1. personam Spiritum Sanctum. Serm. 71. cap. iii. N. v. T. 5. P. 829. A. B.

P. i. Vid. et ep. 195. c. xi. n. 48. T. ii. γεννηθεις ο Χριςος εκ ανευμαίος αδια και απο Μαριας. n Photinus vero novam hæresim jam ante protulerat, a ii. p. 830.

Sabellio quidem in unione dissentiens, sed initium Christi a ακολέθων των διδασκαλα, ψιλον ανθρωπον τον Υιον εδο/- Mariâ prædicabat. Sulpic. Hist. Sacr. I. ii. c. 37. palice. %. 1. Socr. 1. ii. c. 18. p. 96. D.

Photini ergo secta hæc est. Dicit Deum singulum esse 1 Eλείεν δε, ως Θεος μεν εςι παντοκράτωρ είς, και τα ιδια λοίω ac solitarium, et more Judaico confitendum. Trinitatis pleniτα παντα δημιερίησας την δε προ αιωνων γενεσιν τε και υπαρξιν tudinem negat, neque ullam Dei Verbi, aut ullam Spiritus 58 Tis 8 tu posielo ana? ex Mapias yerbal Toy Xp1500€66r,JE11O Sancti putat esse personam. Christum vero hominem tanSoz. I. iv. c. 6. p. 542. A.

& Ibid. D.

tummodo solitarium adserit, cui principium adscribit ex Mariâ. * Ο δε Φωτεινος μιαν ενερίειαν παρος και υία και αδια πνευ- Et hoc omnimodo dogmatizat, solam nos personam Dei Patris, μαλος ειρηκεν, έθεροις ονομασι την των Σαβελλιε δοσμαλων κηρυτ- et solum Christum hominem colere debere. Hæc ergo PhoTwy Slavolay. x. i. Hær. Fab. I. ii. c. Jl. in.

tinus. Vincent. Lirin. Common. cap. 17. Julianus etenim, perfidus imperator, sic Photino hære- P Photinus autem insanissimo Nestorio parem sententiam siarchæ adversus Diodorum scribit : Tu quidem, O Photine, tonuit, Verbum Dei quidem non negans esse in substantiâ : scu verisimilis videris, et proximus salvari, bene faciens, nequả. hoc extrinsecus in isto, qui ex Maria, more communi conjuquam in utero inducens quem credidisti Deum-Diodorus gum, natus est, Jesu inhabitasse peculiariter, &c. Diss. de xii.

Anath. n. xvii. T. ii. p. 128.


Ib. n.

[ocr errors]
« ElőzőTovább »