411 Tr. in Ps. cxviii., Aleph, 1.
412 Ib. Phe, 9.
413 Ib. I 12.
414 E.g. Trin. i. 14, vi. I9.
415 Ib. 1i. 21.
416 Ib. cxviii., Ain, 16, 17.
417 Ib., He, 14.
418 E.g. ib. Iiii. 10.
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.
422 Tr. in Ps. cxxxiv. 1.
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.
426 Tr. in Ps. cxliii. II.
427 Ib. Ii. 16.
428 E.g. ib. lxi. 6, cxviii., He, 12, Nun, 20, Koph, 6.
429 Ib. cxxxv. 4.
430 Ib. 1i. 21.
431 Ib. cxviii, Lamed, 15. Similar passages are fairly numerous; e.g. Comm. in Matt. iv. 26.
432 Trin. vi. 36.
433 Comm. in Matt. xii. 17, xxxi. 5.
434 Trin. i. 14.
435 Ib. ix. 8, commenting on Col. ii. 10
436 Tr. in Ps. Ii. 18, Lxiii. 9,
437 Ib. ii. 41.
438 Ib. cxviii, Gimel, 3.
439 Ib. Iii. 17.
440 Comm. in Matt. x. 19.
441 Tr. in Ps. 19.
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.
444 Trin. vi. 3.
445 Tr. in. lii. 17, Ixix. 3.
446 Trin. viii. 50; Tr. in ps. ii. 28. Cf. Lightfoot on Col. I. 15.
447 Dorner, 1. ii. 399.
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'
1 Matt. xiii. 15 ff.
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 `blasphemous0' creed.
3 Rom. xii. 3.
4 John xx. 17.