Chapter III.--The Epistle of Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria to
Alexander, Bishop of Constantinople.
"To his most revered and likeminded brother Alexander, Alexander
sendeth greeting in the Lord.
"Impelled by avarice and ambition, evil-minded persons have ever
plotted against the wellbeing of the most important dioceses. Under
various pretexts, they attack the religion of the Church; and, being
maddened by the devil, who works in them, they start aside from all
piety according to their own pleasure, and trample under foot the fear
of the judgment of God. Suffering as I do from them myself, I deem it
necessary to inform your piety, that you may be on your guard against
them, lest they or any of their party should presume to enter your
diocese (for these cheats are skilful in deception), or should
circulate false and specious letters, calculated to delude one who has
devoted himself to the simple and undefiled faith.
"Arius and Achillas have lately formed a conspiracy, and, emulating the
ambition of Colluthus, have gone far beyond him [255] . He indeed
sought to find a pretext for his own pernicious line of action in the
charges he brought against them. But they, beholding his making a trade
of Christ for lucre [256] , refused to remain any longer in subjection
to the Church; but built for themselves caves, like robbers, and now
constantly assemble in them, and day and night ply slanders there
against Christ and against us. They revile every godly apostolical
doctrine, and in Jewish fashion have organized a gang to fight against
Christ, denying His divinity, and declaring Him to be on a level with
other men. They pick out every passage which refers to the dispensation
of salvation, and to His humiliation for our sake; they endeavour to
collect from them their own impious assertion, while they evade all
those which declare His eternal divinity, and the unceasing [257] glory
which He possesses with the Father. They maintain the ungodly doctrine
entertained by the Greeks and the Jews concerning Jesus Christ; and
thus, by every means in their power, hunt for their applause.
Everything which outsiders ridicule in us they officiously practise.
They daily excite persecutions and seditions against us. On the one
hand they bring accusations against us before the courts, suborning as
witnesses certain unprincipled women whom they have seduced into error.
On the other they dishonour Christianity by permitting their young
women to ramble about the streets. Nay, they have had the audacity to
rend the seamless garment of Christ, which the soldiers dared not
divide.
"When these actions, in keeping with their course of life, and the
impious enterprise which had been long concealed, became tardily known
to us, we unanimously ejected them from the Church which worships the
divinity of Christ. They then ran hither and thither to form cabals
against us, even addressing themselves to our fellow-ministers who were
of one mind with us, under the pretence of seeking peace and unity with
them, but in truth endeavouring by means of fair words, to sweep some
among them away into their own disease. They ask them to write a wordy
letter, and then read the contents to those whom they have deceived, in
order that they may not retract, but be confirmed in their impiety, by
finding that bishops agree with and support their views. They make no
acknowledgment of the evil doctrines and practices for which they have
been expelled by us, but they either impart them without comment, or
carry on the deception by fallacies and forgeries. Thus concealing
their destructive doctrine by persuasive and meanly truckling language,
they catch the unwary, and lose no opportunity of calumniating our
religion. Hence it arises that several have been led to sign their
letter, and to receive them into communion, a proceeding on the part of
our fellow-ministers which I consider highly reprehensible; for they
thus not only disobey the apostolical rule, but even help to inflame
their diabolical action against Christ. It is on this account, beloved
brethren, that without delay I have stirred myself up to inform you of
the unbelief of certain persons who say that "There was a time when the
Son of God was not [258] ;" and "He who previously had no existence
subsequently came into existence; and when at some time He came into
existence He became such as every other man is." God, they say, created
all things out of that which was non-existent, and they include in the
number of creatures, both rational and irrational, even the Son of God.
Consistently with this doctrine they, as a necessary consequence,
affirm that He is by nature liable to change, and capable both of
virtue and of vice, and thus, by their hypothesis of his having been
created out of that which was non-existent, they overthrow the
testimony of the Divine Scriptures, which declare the immutability of
the Word and the Divinity of the Wisdom of the Word, which Word and
Wisdom is Christ. We are also able,' say these accursed wretches, to
become like Him, the sons of God; for it is written,--I have nourished
and brought up children [259] .' When the continuation of this text is
brought before them, which is, and they have rebelled against Me,' and
it is objected that these words are inconsistent with the Saviour's
nature, which is immutable, they throw aside all reverence, and affirm
that God foreknew and foresaw that His Son would not rebel against Him,
and that He therefore chose Him in preference to all others. They
likewise assert that He was not chosen because He had by nature any
thing superior to the other sons of God; for no man, say they, is son
of God by nature, nor has any peculiar relation to Him. He was chosen,
they allege, because, though mutable by nature, His painstaking
character suffered no deterioration. As though, forsooth, even if a
Paul and a Peter made like endeavours, their sonship would in no
respects differ from His.
"To establish this insane doctrine they insult the Scriptures, and
bring forward what is said in the Psalms of Christ, Thou hast loved
righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore thy God hath anointed thee
with the oil of gladness above thy fellows [260] .' Now that the Son of
God was not created out of the non-existent [261] , and that there
never was a time in which He was not, is expressly taught by John the
Evangelist, who speaks of Him as the only begotten Son which is in the
bosom of the Father [262] .' This divine teacher desired to show that
the Father and the Son are inseparable; and, therefore, he said, that
the Son is in the bosom of the Father.' Moreover, the same John affirms
that the Word of God is not classed among things created out of the
non-existent, for, he says that all things were made by Him [263] ,'
and he also declares His individual personality [264] in the following
words: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God....All things were made by Him, and without Him was
not any thing made that was made [265] .' If, then, all things were
made by Him, how is it that He who thus bestowed existence on all,
could at any period have had no existence himself? The Word, the
creating power, can in no way be defined as of the same nature as the
things created, if indeed He was in the beginning, and all things were
made by Him, and were called by Him out of the non-existent into being.
That which is [266] ' must be of an opposite nature to, and essentially
different from, things created out of the non-existent. This shows,
likewise, that there is no separation between the Father and the Son,
and that the idea of separation cannot even be conceived by the mind;
while the fact that the world was created out of the non-existent
involves a later and fresh genesis of its essential nature [267] , all
things having been endowed with such an origin of existence by the
Father through the Son. John, the most pious apostle, perceiving that
the word was' applied to the Word of God [268] was far beyond and above
the intelligence of created beings, did not presume to speak of His
generation or creation, nor yet dared to name the Maker and the
creature in equivalent syllables. Not that the Son of God is
unbegotten, for the Father alone is unbegotten; but that the ineffable
personality of the only-begotten God is beyond the keenest conception
of the evangelists and perhaps even of angels. Therefore, I do not
think men ought to be considered pious who presume to investigate this
subject, in disobedience to the injunction, Seek not what is too
difficult for thee, neither enquire into what is too high for thee
[269] .' For if the knowledge of many other things incomparably
inferior is beyond the capacity of the human mind, and cannot therefore
be attained, as has been said by Paul, Eye hath not seen, nor ear
heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God
hath prepared for them that love Him [270] ,' and as God also said to
Abraham, that the stars could not be numbered by him [271] ; and it is
likewise said, Who shall number the grains of sand by the sea-shore, or
the drops of rain [272] ?' how then can any one but a madman presume to
enquire into the nature of the Word of God? It is said by the Spirit of
prophecy, Who shall declare His generation [273] ?' And, therefore, our
Saviour in His kindness to those men who were the pillars of the whole
world, desiring to relieve them of the burden of striving after this
knowledge, told them that it was beyond their natural comprehension,
and that the Father alone could discern this most divine mystery; No
man,' said He, knoweth the Son but the Father, and no man knoweth the
Father save the Son [274] .' It was, I think, concerning this same
subject that the Father said, My secret is for Me and for Mine [275] .'
"But the insane folly of imagining that the Son of God came into being
out of that which had no being, and that His sending forth took place
in time, is plain from the words which had no being,' although the
foolish are incapable of perceiving the folly of their own utterances.
For the phrase He was not' must either have reference to time, or to
some interval in the ages. If then it be true that all things were made
by Him, it is evident that every age, time, all intervals of time, and
that when' in which was not' has its place, were made by Him. And is it
not absurd to say that there was a time when He who created all time,
and ages, and seasons, with which the was not' is confused, was not?
For it would be the height of ignorance, and contrary indeed to all
reason, to affirm that the cause of any created thing can be posterior
to that caused by it. The interval during which they say the Son was
still unbegotten of the Father was, according to their opinion, prior
to the wisdom of God, by whom all things were created. They thus
contradict the Scripture which declares Him to be the firstborn of
every creature [276] .' In consonance with this doctrine, Paul with his
usual mighty voice cries concerning Him; whom He hath appointed heir of
all things, by whom also He made the worlds [277] ' For by Him were all
things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and
invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or
powers: all things were created by Him and for Him: and He is before
all things [278] ' Since the hypothesis implied in the phrase out of
the non-existent' is manifestly impious, it follows that the Father is
always Father. And He is Father from the continual presence of the Son,
on account of whom He is called [279] Father. And the Son being ever
present with Him, the Father is ever perfect, wanting in no good thing,
for He did not beget His only Son in time, or in any interval of time,
nor out of that which had no previous existence.
"Is it not then impious to say that there was a time when the wisdom of
God was not? Who saith, I was by Him as one brought up with Him: I was
daily His delight [280] ?' Or that once the power of God was not, or
His Word, or anything else by which the Son is known, or the Father
designated, defective? To assert that the brightness of the Father's
glory once did not exist,' destroys also the original light of which it
is the brightness [281] ; and if there ever was a time in which the
image of God was not, it is plain that He Whose image He is, is not
always: nay, by the non-existence of the express image of God's Person,
He also is taken away of whom this is ever the express image. Hence it
may be seen, that the Sonship of our Saviour has not even anything in
common with the sonship of men. For just as it has been shown that the
nature of His existence cannot be expressed by language, and infinitely
surpasses in excellence all things to which He has given being, so His
Sonship, naturally partaking in His paternal Divinity, is unspeakably
different from the sonship of those who, by His appointment, have been
adopted as sons. He is by nature immutable, perfect, and
all-sufficient, whereas men are liable to change, and need His help.
What further advance can be made by the wisdom of God [282] ? What can
the Very Truth, or God the Word, add to itself? How can the Life or the
True Light in any way be bettered? And is it not still more contrary to
nature to suppose that wisdom can be susceptible of folly? that the
power of God can be united with weakness? that reason itself can be
dimmed by unreasonableness, or that darkness can be mixed with the true
light? Does not the Apostle say, What communion hath light with
darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial [283] ?' and
Solomon, that the way of a serpent upon a rock [284] ' was too
wonderful' for the human mind to comprehend, which rock,' according to
St. Paul, is Christ [285] . Men and angels, however, who are His
creatures, have received His blessing, enabling them to exercise
themselves in virtue and in obedience to His commands, that thus they
may avoid sin. And it is on this account that our Lord being by nature
the Son of the Father, is worshipped by all; and they who have put off
the spirit of bondage, and by brave deeds and advance in virtue have
received the spirit of adoption through the kindness of Him Who is the
Son of God by nature, by adoption also become sons.
"His true, peculiar, natural, and special Sonship was declared by Paul,
who, speaking of God, says, that He spared not His own Son, but
delivered Him up for us [286] ,' who are not by nature His sons. It was
to distinguish Him from those who are not His own,' that he called Him
His own son.' It is also written in the Gospel, This is My beloved Son
in whom I am well pleased [287] ;' and in the Psalms the Saviour says,
The Lord said unto Me, Thou art My Son [288] .' By proclaiming natural
sonship He shows that there are no other natural sons besides Himself.
"And do not these words, I begot thee from the womb before the morning
[289] ,' plainly show the natural sonship of the paternal birth [290]
of One whose lot it is, not from diligence of conduct, or exercise in
moral progress, but by individuality of nature? Hence it ensues that
the filiation of the only-begotten Son of the Father is incapable of
fall; while the adoption of reasonable beings who are not His sons by
nature, but merely on account of fitness of character, and by the
bounty of God, may fall away, as it is written in the word, The sons of
God saw the daughters of men, and took them as wives,' and so forth
[291] . And God, speaking by Isaiah, said, I have nourished and brought
up children, and they have rebelled against Me [292] .'
"I have many things to say, beloved, but because I fear that I shall
cause weariness by further admonishing teachers who are of one mind
with myself, I pass them by. You, having been taught of God, are not
ignorant that the teaching at variance with the religion of the Church
which has just arisen, is the same as that propagated by Ebion [293]
and Artemas [294] , and rivals that of Paul of Samosata, bishop of
Antioch, who was excommunicated by a council of all the bishops.
Lucianus [295] , his successor, withdrew himself from communion with
these bishops during a period of many years.
"And now amongst us there have sprung up, out of the non-existent' men
who have greedily sucked down the dregs of this impiety, offsets of the
same stock: I mean Arius and Achillas, and all their gang of rogues.
Three bishops [296] of Syria, appointed no one knows how, by consenting
to them, fire them to more fatal heat. I refer their sentence to your
decision. Retaining in their memory all that they can collect
concerning the suffering, humiliation, emptying of Himself [297] , and
so-called poverty, and everything of which the Saviour for our sake
accepted the acquired name, they bring forward those passages to
disprove His eternal existence and divinity, while they forget all
those which declare His glory and nobility and abiding with the Father;
as for instance, I and My father are one [298] .' In these words the
Lord does not proclaim Himself to be the Father, neither does He
represent two natures as one; but that the essence of the Son of the
Father preserves accurately the likeness of the Father, His nature
taking off the impress of likeness to Him in all things, being the
exact image of the Father and the express stamp of the prototype. When,
therefore, Philip, desirous of seeing the Father, said to Him, Lord,
show us the Father,' the Lord with abundant plainness said to him, He
that hath seen Me hath seen the Father [299] ,' as though the Father
were beheld in the spotless and living mirror of His image. The same
idea is conveyed in the Psalms, where the saints say, In Thy light we
shall see light [300] .' It is on this account that he who honoureth
the Son, honoureth the Father [301] .' And rightly, for every impious
word which men dare to utter against the Son is spoken also against the
Father.
"After this no one can wonder at the false calumnies which I am about
to detail, my beloved brethren, propagated by them against me, and
against our most religious people. They not only set their battle in
array against the divinity of Christ, but ungratefully insult us. They
think it beneath them to be compared with any of those of old time, nor
do they endure to be put on a par with the teachers we have been
conversant with from childhood. They will not admit that any of our
fellow-ministers anywhere possess even mediocrity of intelligence. They
say that they themselves alone are the wise and the poor, and
discoverers of doctrines, and to them alone have been revealed those
truths which, say they, have never entered the mind of any other
individuals under the sun. O what wicked arrogance! O what excessive
folly! What false boasting, joined with madness and Satanic pride, has
hardened their impious hearts! They are not ashamed to oppose the godly
clearness of the ancient scriptures, nor yet does the unanimous piety
of all our fellow-ministers concerning Christ blunt their audacity.
Even devils will not suffer impiety like this; for even they refrain
from speaking blasphemy against the Son of God.
"These then are the questions I have to raise, according to the ability
I possess, with those who from their rude resources throw dust on the
Christ, and try to slander our reverence for Him. These inventors of
silly tales assert that we, who reject their impious and unscriptural
blasphemy concerning the creation of Christ from the non-existent,
teach that there are two unbegotten Beings. For these ill-instructed
men contend that one of these alternatives must hold; either He must be
believed to have come out of the non-existent, or there are two
unbegotten Beings. In their ignorance and want of practice in theology
they do not realize how vast must be the distance between the Father
who is uncreate, and the creatures, whether rational or irrational,
which He created out of the non-existent; and that the only-begotten
nature of Him Who is the Word of God, by Whom the Father created the
universe out of the non-existent, standing, as it were, in the middle
between the two, was begotten of the self-existent Father, as the Lord
Himself testified when He said, Every one that loveth the Father,
loveth also the Son that is begotten of Him [302] .'
"We believe, as is taught by the apostolical Church, in an only
unbegotten Father, Who of His being hath no cause, immutable and
invariable, and Who subsists always in one state of being, admitting
neither of progression nor of diminution; Who gave the law, and the
prophets, and the gospel; of patriarchs and apostles, and of all
saints, Lord: and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of
God, begotten not out of that which is not, but of the Father, Who is;
yet not after the manner of material bodies, by severance or emanation,
as Sabellius [303] and Valentinus [304] taught; but in an inexpressible
and inexplicable manner, according to the saying which we quoted above,
Who shall declare His generation [305] ?' since no mortal intellect can
comprehend the nature of His Person, as the Father Himself cannot be
comprehended, because the nature of reasonable beings is unable to
grasp the manner in which He was begotten of the Father [306] .
"But those who are led by the Spirit of truth have no need to learn
these things of me, for the words long since spoken by the Saviour yet
sound in our ears, No one knoweth who the Father is but the Son, and no
one knoweth who the Son is but the Father [307] .' We have learnt that
the Son is immutable and unchangeable, all-sufficient and perfect, like
the Father, lacking only His "unbegotten." He is the exact and
precisely similar image of His Father. For it is clear that the image
fully contains everything by which the greater likeness exists, as the
Lord taught us when He said, My Father is greater than I [308] .' And
in accordance with this we believe that the Son always existed of the
Father; for he is the brightness of His glory, and the express image of
His Father's Person [309] ." But let no one be led by the word always'
to imagine that the Son is unbegotten, as is thought by some who have
their intellects blinded: for to say that He was, that He has always
been, and that before all ages, is not to say that He is unbegotten.
"The mind of man could not possibly invent a term expressive of what is
meant by being unbegotten. I believe that you are of this opinion; and,
indeed, I feel confident in your orthodox view that none of these terms
in any way signify the unbegotten. For all the terms appear to signify
merely the extension of time, and are not adequate to express the
divinity and, as it were, the primæval being of the only-begotten Son.
They were used by the holy men who earnestly endeavoured to clear up
the mystery, and who asked pardon from those who heard them, with a
reasonable excuse for their failure, by saying as far as our
comprehension has reached.' But if those who allege that what was known
in part' has been done away [310] ' for them, expect from human lips
anything beyond human powers, it is plain that the terms was,' and
ever,' and before all ages,' fall far short of this expectation. But
whatever they may mean, it is not the same as the unbegotten.'
Therefore His own individual dignity must be reserved to the Father as
the Unbegotten One, no one being called the cause of His existence: to
the Son likewise must be given the honour which befits Him, there being
to Him a generation from the Father which has no beginning; we must
render Him worship, as we have already said, only piously and
religiously ascribing to Him the was' and the ever,' and the before all
ages;' not however rejecting His divinity, but ascribing to Him a
perfect likeness in all things to His Father, while at the same time we
ascribe to the Father alone His own proper glory of the unbegotten,'
even as the Saviour Himself says, My Father is greater than I [311] .'
"And in addition to this pious belief respecting the Father and the
Son, we confess as the Sacred Scriptures teach us, one Holy Ghost, who
moved the saints of the Old Testament, and the divine teachers of that
which is called the New. We believe in one only Catholic Church, the
apostolical, which cannot be destroyed even though all the world were
to take counsel to fight against it, and which gains the victory over
all the impious attacks of the heterodox; for we are emboldened by the
words of its Master, Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world [312]
.' After this, we receive the doctrine of the resurrection from the
dead, of which Jesus Christ our Lord became the first-fruits; Who bore
a Body, in truth, not in semblance, derived from Mary the mother of God
[313] ; in the fulness of time sojourning among the race, for the
remission of sins: who was crucified and died, yet for all this
suffered no diminution of His Godhead. He rose from the dead, was taken
into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.
"In this epistle I have only mentioned these things in part, deeming
it, as I have said, wearisome to dwell minutely on each article, since
they are well known to your pious diligence. These things we teach,
these things we preach; these are the dogmas of the apostolic Church,
for which we are ready to die, caring little for those who would force
us to forswear them; for we will never relinquish our hope in them,
though they should try to compel us by tortures.
"Arius and Achillas, together with their fellow foes, have been
expelled from the Church, because they have become aliens from our
pious doctrine: according to the blessed Paul, who said, If any of you
preach any other gospel than that which you have received, let him be
accursed, even though he should pretend to be an angel from heaven
[314] , and But if any man teach otherwise, and consent not to
wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the
doctrine which is according to godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing
[315] ,' and so forth. Since, then, they have been condemned by the
brotherhood, let none of you receive them, nor attend to what they say
or write. They are deceivers, and propagate lies, and they never adhere
to the truth. They go about to different cities with no other intent
than to deliver letters under the pretext of friendship and in the name
of peace, and by hypocrisy and flattery to obtain other letters in
return, in order to deceive a few silly women who are laden with sins
[316] .' I beseech you, beloved brethren, to avoid those who have thus
dared to act against Christ, who have publicly held up the Christian
religion to ridicule, and have eagerly sought to make a display before
judicial tribunals, who have endeavoured to excite a persecution
against us at a period of the most entire peace, and who have enervated
the unspeakable mystery of the generation of Christ. Unite unanimously
in opposition to them, as some of our fellow-ministers have already
done, who, being filled with indignation, wrote to me against them, and
signed our formulary [317] .
"I have sent you these letters by my son Apion, the deacon; being those
of (the ministers in) all Egypt and the Thebaid, also of those of
Libya, and the Pentapolis, of Syria, Lycia, Pamphylia, Asia,
Cappadocia, and in the other adjoining countries. Whose example you
likewise, I trust, will follow. Many kindly attempts have been made by
me to gain back those who have been led astray, but no remedy has
proved more efficacious in restoring the laity who have been deceived
by them and leading them to repentance, than the manifestation of the
union of our fellow-ministers. Salute one another, with the brotherhood
that is with you. I pray that you may be strong in the Lord, my
beloved, and that I may receive the fruit of your love to Christ.
"The following are the name of those who have been anathematized as
heretics: among the presbyters, Arius; among the deacons, Achillas,
Euzoius, Aïthales, Lucius, Sarmates, Julius, Menas, another Arius, and
Helladius."
Alexander wrote in the same strain to Philogonius [318] , bishop of
Antioch, to Eustathius [319] , who then ruled the church of the
Beroeans, and to all those who defended the doctrines of the Apostles.
But Arius could not endure to keep quiet, but wrote to all those whom
he believed to agree with him in opinion. His letter to Eusebius,
bishop of Nicomedia, is a clear proof that the divine Alexander wrote
nothing that was false concerning him. I shall here insert his letter,
in order that the names of those who were implicated in his impiety may
become generally known.
[255] Alexander's words seem to imply that Colluthus began his
schismatical proceedings in assuming to exercise episcopal functions
before the separation of Arius from the Church, and that one cause of
his wrong action was impatience at the mild course at first adopted by
Alexander towards Arius. The Council of Alexandria held in a.d. 324
under Hosius, decided that he was only a Presbyter.
[256] chriostemporia. The word christemporos is applied in the
"Didache" to lazy consumers of alms. Cf. Ps. Ignat. ad Trall.: ou
christianoi alla christemporoi, Ps. Ignat. ad Mag. ix., and Bp.
Lightfoot's note.
[257] Readings vary between alektos = indescribable, and alektos =
ceaseless. Cf. 'Alekto, the Fury.
[258] En pote hote ouk en ho hui& 232;s tou theou. kai Gegonen husteron
ho proteron me huparchon toioutos genomenos hote kai pote gegonen hoios
kai pas pephuken anthropos
[259] Isai. i. 2 huious egennesa kai hupsosa, as in Sept. Vulg., filios
enutrivi et exaltavi. Revd., marg., "made great and exalted."
[260] Ps. xlv. 7, as in Sept., except that adikian is substituted for
anomian
[261] Oute ex ouk onton gegenetai
[262] John i. 18
[263] John i. 3
[264] hupostasin
[265] John i. 1, 3
[266] to on, the self-existent of philosophy.
[267] The history of the word hupostasis is of crucial value in the
study of the Arian controversy. Its various usages may be classified as
(i) Classical; (ii) Scriptural; (iii) Ecclesiastical. The correlative
substantive of the verb huphistemi, I make to stand under, [from hupo =
sub. under, and histemi, [STA]; it means primarily a standing under.
Hence, materially, it means in (i) Classical Greek, sediment, prop.
foundation: substances as opposed to their reflexions, substantial
nature, as of timber [Theoph. C. P. 5. 16. 4]. So naturally grew the
signification of ground of hope, actual existence; and, in the later
philosophy, it had come to be employed instead of ousia for the noetic
substratum "underlying" the phænomena. (ii) Scriptural. In the N.T. it
is found five times, twice in 2 Cor. and thrice in Heb. (a) 2 Cor. ix.
4, and (b) xi. 17. "Confidence" of boasting. (g) Heb. i. 3, ho
charakter tes hupostaseos, A.V. the express image of His "person."
R.V., the very image of His "substance." (d) Heb. iii. 14,
"Confidence". (e) Heb. xi. 1, A.V. "substance" of things hoped for.
R.V. Assurance of things hoped for. (iii) Ecclesiastical. The earlier
ecclesiastical use, like the later philosophical, identified it with
ousia, and so the Nicene Confession anathematized those who maintained
the Son to be of a different substance or essence from the Father
(hupostaseos e ousias). In the version of Hilary of Poictiers (de
Synodis, §84; Op. ii. 510) ousia is translated by "substantia," the
etymological equivalent of hupostasis, except in the phrase quoted,
when "substantia aut essentia" represents ousia by its own etymological
equivalent "essentia." Thus in a.d. 325 to have contended for treis
hupostaseis would have been heretical. But as the subtilty of
controversy required greater nicety of phrase, it was laid down (Basil
the Great, Ep. 38) that while ousia is an universal denoting that which
is common to the individuals of a species, hupostasis makes an
individual that which it is, and constitutes personal existence. Hence
mia hupostasis became Sabellian, and treis ousiai Arian, while treis
hupostaseis was orthodox. cf Theod. Dial. i. 7. Eranistes loq. "Is
there any distinction between ousia and hupostasis?" Orthodoxus. "In
extra-Christian philosophy there is not; for ousia signifies to on,
that which is, and hupostasis that which subsists. But according to the
doctrine of the Fathers there is the same difference between ousia and
hupostasis as between the common and the particular; the race, and the
species or individual."..."The Divine ousia (substance) means the Holy
Trinity; but the hupostasis indicates any prosopon (person) as of the
Father, the Son, or of the Holy Ghost. For we who follow the
definitions of the Fathers assert hupostasis, prosopon and idiotes
(substantial nature, person, or individuality) to mean the same thing."
Vide also Newman's Arians of the Fourth Century, Appendix, Note iv.
fourth Edition.
[268] "In the beginning was the word." John i. 1
[269] Ecclus. iii. 21
[270] 1 Cor. ii. 9
[271] Gen. xv. 5
[272] Ecclus. i. 2
[273] Isai. liii. 8
[274] Matt. xi. 27
[275] Is. xxiv. 16: "My leanness, my leanness, woe unto me." A.V.
"Secretum meum mihi." Vulg.
[276] Col. i. 15
[277] Heb. i. 2. Vide Alford. proleg. to Ep. to Heb., "Nowhere except
in the Alexandrian Church does there seem to have existed any idea that
the Epistle was St. Paul's." "At Alexandria the conventional habit of
quoting the Epistle as St. Paul's gradually prevailed over critical
suspicion and early tradition."
[278] Col. i. 16, 17
[279] chrematizo = (i) to have dealings with; (ii) to deal with an
oracle or divine power; (iii) to get a name for dealing, and so to be
called. Cf. Matt. ii. 12; Acts xi. 26
[280] Prov. viii. 30
[281] Heb. i. 3 on apaugasma tes Doxes kai charakter tes hupostaseos
autou
[282] Contrast the advance of the manhood. Luke ii. 52, "proukopte,"
the word used in the text.
[283] 2 Cor. vi. 14, 15
[284] Prov. xxx. 19
[285] 1 Cor. x. 4
[286] Rom. viii. 32
[287] Matt. iii. 17
[288] Ps. ii. 7
[289] Ps. cx. 3. Sept. ek gastros pro 'Eosphorou egennesa se
[290] The readings vary between genneseos, geneseos, and maieuseos (cf.
Plat. Theæt. 150 B), which is adopted by Valesius.
[291] Gen. vi. 2
[292] Isa. i. 2
[293] The imaginary name for the founder of Ebionism, first started by
Tertullian. 'vyvn = poor.
[294] Artemas, or Artemon, a philosophizing denier of Christ's
divinity, excommunicated by Pope Zephyrinus (a.d. 202-21).
[295] Lucianus, the presbyter of Antioch, who became the head of the
theological school of that city in which the leaders of the Arian
heresy were trained, after the deposition of Paulus refused to hold
communion with his three successors in the patriarchate, Domnus,
Timæus, and Cyril. During the episcopate of the last named he once more
entered into communion with the church of Antioch. On the importance of
Lucianus as founder of the Arians, Vide Newman's Arians of the Fourth
Century, Chap. I. Sec. i. and cf. the letter of Arius post. Chap. iv.
[296] Eusebius of Cæsarea, Theodotus of Laodicea, and Paulinus of Tyre.
See Arius' letter to Eusebius of Nicomedia, ch. iv.
[297] kenosis, cf. Phil. ii. 7
[298] John x. 30
[299] John xiv. 9
[300] Ps. xxxvi. 9
[301] John v. 23
[302] 1 John v. 1
[303] Condemned a.d. 261 by Council held at Alexandria.
[304] Taught in Rome in a.d. 140, and died in Cyprus in a.d. 160.
[305] Isa. liii. 8
[306] he patrike theogonia
[307] Matt. xi. 27: observe the slight variation.
[308] John xiv. 28
[309] Heb. i. 3
[310] 1 Cor. xiii. 10
[311] John xiv. 28
[312] John xvi. 33
[313] ek tes Theotokou Marias
[314] Gal. i. 9
[315] 1 Tim. vi. 3, 4
[316] 2 Tim. iii. 6
[317] Tomos. (i) a cut or slice; (ii) a portion of a roll, volume, or
"tome."
[318] Vide supra.
[319] Bp. first Beroea in Syria and then of Antioch, c. 324-331.
Beroea, the Helbon of Ezekiel (xxvii. 18) is now Aleppo or Haleb.
