Sister Projects: Wikichristian | WikiMD
BelieversCafe is a large collection of christian articles with over 40,000 pages
Our sponsors:
9 [Canons 17, 18, 20, agree with Apostolic Constitutions, vi.. 17, ii. 6.-R.]
10 [After Origen. Comp. Melito, vol. viii., this series.]
11 [Canons 21-24 agree with the first of the Nicene Council (Hefele, Christian Councils, i. pp. 375, 376). Some hold that canon to refer to these, others find in the enlarged application of Canon 24 a proof of the later date of this collection.-R.]
12 Nah. i. 9. [Canons 25, 26, are referred to by Basil the Great (Ad Amphilochium, iii.). In the Greek collection 26 is joined with 25.-R.]
13 [Apostolic Constitutions, vi. 17.-R.]
14 1 Pet. ii. 23. [This canon seems of late origin, probably from Synod of Constantinople, A.D. 394.-R.]
15 [The closing clause points to a comparatively late date, as do the contents of Canon 31.-R.]
16 [Canons 32-41 also agree with those of Antioch; see note on Canon 9. Some of the regulations have, however, an earlier date: whether they existed in this form before that time, is open to discussion.-R .]
17 [This canon is divided by most editors of the Greek text; forming, in their enumeration, Canons 38 and 39.-R.]
18 [Hefele and others regard Canons 42-44 as among the most ancient of this collection, and of unknown origin.-R.]
19 [The substance of this canon is very ancient, Hefele thinks; but Drey derives it from Canons 9, 33, 34, of the Synod of Laodicea, about A.D. 363.-R.]
20 2 Cor. vi. 5. [Drey regards this as very ancient; but Hefele derives it and the following one from the Apostolic Constitutions, vi. 15.-R.]
21 [Very ancient, of unknown origin; repeated in canons of Elvira and Arles.-R.]
22 From Apostolic Constitutions, vi. 11, 26.-R]
23 [This canon, the last of those in the collection of Dionysius, is regarded as among the most recent. Of unknown origin.-R.] At the end of this canon, in the collection of John of Antioch, the following words are added: "Let him that is baptized be taught that the Father was not crucified, nor endured to be born of man, nor indeed that the Holy Spirit became man, or even endured suffering, for He was not made flesh; but the only begotten Son ransomed the world from the wrath which lay upon it: for He became man through His love of man, having fashioned a body for Himself from a virgin. For Wisdom built a house for herself as a Creator; but He willingly endured the cross, and rescued the world from the wrath that lies on it, namely, those who are baptized into the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. But let those who do not thus baptize be suspended, as being ignorant of the mystery of piety." The same collection gives the following as Canon 51: "He who says that the Father suffered is more impious than the Jews, nailing along with Christ the Father also. He who denies that the only begotten Son was made flesh for us, and endured the cross, fights with God, and is an enemy of the saints. He that names the Holy Spirit Father or Son, is ignorant and foolish; for the Son is Creator along with the Father, and has the same throne, and is Lawgiver along with Him, and Judge, and the cause of the resurrection; and the Holy Spirit is the same in substance: for the Godhead has three Persons, the same in substance. For in our day Simon the magician gave forth his doctrines, drawing the speechless, delusive, unstable, and wicked spirit to himself, and babbling that there is one God with three names, and sometimes erasing the passion and birth of Christ. Do you, then, most beloved ones, baptize into one Father, and Son, and the Holy Spirit as third, according to the will of the Lord, and our constitution made in the spirit."
26 [Canons 51-53 are from the Apostolic Constitutions: the first from vi. 8, 10, 26; the second from ii. 12, 13; the third from v. 20.-R.]
29 [Canons 54-57 are of unknown origin; the first is deemed ancient, while the conduct forbidden in the others points to a more recent date. Drey thinks the distinctions of the clergy also point to a later date.-R.]
31 [Canon 58 is supposed to refer to the absence of bishops at the imperial city, which prevailed in the middle of the fourth century.-R.]
32 [Canon 59 resembles the twenty-fifth canon of Synod of Antioch; see on Canon 9.-R.]
33 [Of doubtful origin, but resembling Apostolic Constitutions vi. 16, though probably of later date.-R.]
34 [Canons 61, 62, are of unknown origin.-R.]
36 [Canon 63 is regarded as very ancient.-R.]
37 [Canon 64 is numbered as 66 In Hefele's edition, being preceded by Canons 65 and 66 as given above. It is from Apostolic Constitutions, v. 20.-R.]
38 [Canon 65 is from Apostolic Constitutions, ii. 61.-R.]
39 [Of unknown but probably late origin.-R.]
40 [Drey makes this one of the most recent canons of the collection.-R.]
41 [Of unknown origin, probably recent.-R.]
42 [Drey considers Canon 69 to be very ancient, but also intimates that it and Canon 70 were taken from the pseudo-Ignatian Epistle to the Philippians; see the same, chap. xiii., latter half, vol. i. p. 119, of this series.-R.]
43 [With Canons 70, 71, compare Synod of Elvira (A.D. 305 or 306), Canons 49, 50, in Hefele, vol. i. pp. 158, 159. Drey, however, derives them from Canons 37-39 of Laodicea (A.D. 363).-R.]
44 Lev. v. 16. [It is argued from the theft forbidden that this canon is more recent; its origin is unknown.-R.]
45 [The wealth here implied points to a comparatively late origin; Hefele assigns it to the second half of the third century, but Drey gives a later date.-R.]
46 [Hefele thinks both this and the following canon to be later than the Nicaean Council. Drey, however, derives Canon 74 from the council at Chalcedon (A.D. 451), a view opposed by both Bickell and Hefele.-R.]
47 Deut xix. 15. [According to Drey this canon is from the Council of Constantinople (sixth canon), in A.D. 381.-R.]
48 [Drey derives this from Canon 23, Synod of Antioch, A.D. 341.-R.]