Ilaria Ramelli on Hilary of Poitiers: a critical assessment

 

Ilaria Ramelli on Hilary of Poitiers: a critical assessment

In her book ‘A Larger Hope? Vol. 1’, Ilaria Ramelli has a brief section about Hilary of Poitiers:

“Hilary of Poitiers and His Corporate Soteriology

Hilary († 367ca), bishop of Poitiers in Gaul, a devoted anti-Arian, knew and admired Origen, and even translated nearly 40,000 lines from his Greek works into Latin, if we credit Jerome (Apology against Rufinus 1). It is therefore not surprising to find that he took over Origen’s interpretation of God’s actions of destruction as remedial. Commenting on Psalm 2:8–9, he observes that God will bruise and break the nations “in order to reform them.” Sinners are slain by God when they die to vices and sins, and are redeemed (Treatises on Psalms 139.19). This is typically Origenian exegesis. Moreover, for Hilary, Christ’s incarnation is salvific for all humanity, because Christ’s body—which is also the church—contains every human individual (“corporate soteriology” or “physicalist soteriology”). This is also what Origen maintained, and this model will be taken over by Gregory of Nyssa.

…

Very interestingly, Hilary’s interpretation of the Parable of the Lost Sheep—identifying the lost sheep with all of humanity, which is to be restored—coincides exactly with that offered by Adamantius (Origen’s byname) in the Dialogue of Adamantius. Hilary, referring to Luke 15:4, explains:

This one sheep is the human being, and by one human being the whole race is to be understood . . . the ninety-nine are the heavenly angels . . . and by us [humans], who are all one [sc. because we share the same human nature], the number of the heavenly church is to be filled up. This is why every creature awaits the revelation of the children of God. (Commentary on Matthew 18)” (Ilaria Ramelli, A Larger Hope?, vol. 1, pp. 80-81)

While I do find interesting this section about Hilary of Poitiers, I feel like Ilaria Ramelli here has been excessively selective. The above quotes do suggest that Hilary was indeed an universalist but, at the same time, in another work, Hilary does seem to envision eschatological punishments as irrevocable:

"Suppose then we interpret the end as a dissolution, we are forced to acknowledge that, since there is an end for the blessed and for the wicked, the issue levels the godly with the ungodly, for the appointed end of both is a common annihilation. What of our expectation in heaven, if for us as well as for the wicked the end is a cessation of being? But even if there remains for the saints an expectation. whereas for the wicked there waits the end they have deserved, we cannot conceive that end as a final dissolution. What punishment would it be for the wicked to be beyond the feeling of avenging torments, because the capability of suffering has been removed by dissolution? The end is, therefore, a culminating and irrevocable condition which awaits us, reserved for the blessed and prepared for the wicked."(On the Trinity, book 11.28, source: https://historicalchristian.faith/by_father.php?file=Hilary%2520of%2520Poitiers%2FOn%2520the%2520Trinity%2FBook%252011.html )

It is admittedly hard to make an universalist reading of this. At the same time, though, there is a letter of Jerome of Stridon, apparently written in 394, in which he appears to endorse an universalist eschatology and strangely alludes to Hilary’s work quoted above:

“5. Your third and last question relates to the passage in the same epistle where the apostle in discussing the resurrection, comes to the words: “for he must reign, till he has put all things under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he has put all things under his feet. But when he says, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him that God may be all in all.” I am surprised that you have resolved to question me about this passage when that reverend man, Hilary, bishop of Poictiers, has occupied the eleventh book of his treatise against the Arians with a full examination and explanation of it. Yet I may at least say a few words. The chief stumbling-block in the passage is that the Son is said to be subject to the Father. Now which is the more shameful and humiliating, to be subject to the Father (often a mark of loving devotion as in the psalm “truly my soul is subject unto God”) or to be crucified and made the curse of the cross? “For cursed is everyone that hangs on a tree.” If Christ then for our sakes was made a curse that He might deliver us from the curse of the law, are you surprised that He is also for our sakes subject to the Father to make us too subject to Him as He says in the gospel: “No man comes unto the Father but by me”, and “I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” Christ then is subject to the Father in the faithful; for all believers, nay the whole human race, are accounted members of His body. But in unbelievers, that is in Jews, heathens, and heretics, He is said to be not subject; for these members of His body are not subject to the faith. But in the end of the world when all His members shall see Christ, that is their own body, reigning, they also shall be made subject to Christ, that is to their own body, that the whole of Christ's body may be subject unto God and the Father, and that God may be all in all. He does not say that the Father may be all in all but that God may be, a title which properly belongs to the Trinity and may be referred not only to the Father but also to the Son and to the Holy Ghost. His meaning therefore is that humanity may be subject to the Godhead. By humanity we here intend not that gentleness and kindness which the Greeks call philanthropy but the whole human race. Moreover when he says that God may be all in all, it is to be taken in this sense. At present our Lord and Saviour is not all in all, but only a part in each of us. For instance He is wisdom in Solomon, generosity in David, patience in Job, knowledge of things to come in Daniel, faith in Peter, zeal in Phinehas and Paul, virginity in John, and other virtues in others. But when the end of all things shall come, then shall He be all in all, for then the saints shall severally possess all the virtues and all will possess Christ in His entirety.” (Letter 55.5, c.a. 394, source: https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3001055.htm ; bolded mine)

This passage from Jerome does indeed seem to endorse universalism and he does refer to the work of Hilary quoted above which, on the contrary, doesn’t seem to endorse universalism. So, perhaps Jerome misinterpreted the text of Hilary.  

For more quotes see: https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/05/possible-traces-of-universalism-in.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ancient and Medieval witnesses of the presence of ‘universalism’ in Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia

Ancient and Medieval witnesses of the presence of ‘universalism’ [1] in  Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia Introduction In this text, witnesses of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s and Diodore of Tarsus’ eschatological ‘universalist’ views, are reported.  As shall we see, the attestations of Diodore’s endorsement of a form of apokatastasis are always accompanied by an attestation of his disciple, Theodore, endorsing the same view. All these common testimonies are from Syriac sources, both Eastern-Syriac - Isaac of Nineveh (fl. 7 th century in his Second Part, 39.7-14; for Theodore only in his Second Part, 3.3.94 ), Solomon of Basra (fl. 13 th century in his book of the Bee, 60 ), Theodore bar Konai (fl. 8 th century in his Liber Scholiorum 2.63 ) - and Western-Syriac - John of Dara (fl. 9 th century in his On the Resurrection of Human Bodies 4.21 ). There is a brief comparison of a passage in Isaac’s Third Part (discourse 6) about eschatological punishments and the cont...
Read more

On the presence of universalism in East Syrian tradition

On the presence of universalism [1] in East Syrian tradition East Syrian theologians were influenced by Diodore of Tarsus (fl. 4 th century), his disciple Theodore of Mopsuestia (fl. 4-5 th century) who is called the ‘Interpreter/Exegete/Expositor’ in the East Syrian church (also called ‘Church of the East’), and Evagrius Ponticus (fl. 4 th century) [2] .  The point of this text is to show that there a was significant prevalence of the idea in this tradition (this doesn’t necessarily mean that it was a majority view). For more details about Diodore and Theodore see my previous post: https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/01/ancient-and-medieval-witnesses-of_28.html An updated version of this post can be found here:  https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/03/on-presence-of-universalism-in-east.html  A testimony of an opponent: Babai the Great (fl. 6 th century): Let me start with the testimony of an opponent of ‘universalism’ in the East-Syrian Ch...
Read more

On the possible presence of universalism in some ancient Christians Latin authors

  On the possible presence of universalism in some ancient Christians Latin authors Introduction In what follows, I’ll present some evidence for the presence of a doctrine or a sympathy of universalism (i.e. the belief that all human beings will be ultimately saved) in some Latin Fathers. There are some suggestive passages in the writings of Ambrose of Milan and John Cassian. Also, Rufinus of Aquileia, in his quarrel against Jerome of Stridon, while admitting that the fate of the wicked is a mystery shows a clear sympathy for the doctrine of universalism. However, it should be noted that none of the figures I quote in this post have been cited as universalists (as far as I know) before the 19 th century and, also, the interpretation of their texts never seem to have caused controversy among later writers (again, as far as I know) about the possible presence of genuine universalist beliefs or interpolations in their texts. While this fact alone doesn’t exclude an universalist...
Read more