Übersetzung
ausblenden
Kirchengeschichte
Kapitel V. Der Streit des Arius mit Alexander, seinem Bischof.
Nachdem Petrus, Bischof von Alexandria, unter Diokletian den Märtyrertod erlitten hatte, wurde Achillas in der oben erwähnten Friedenszeit in das Bischofsamt eingesetzt, dem Alexander folgte. In furchtloser Ausübung seines Amtes zur Unterweisung und Leitung der Kirche versuchte er eines Tages in Anwesenheit des Presbyteriums und des übrigen Klerus, das große theologische Geheimnis - dieEinheit *der Heiligen Dreifaltigkeit - mit vielleicht zu philosophischer Minutiösität zu erklären. Ein gewisser Presbyter unter seiner Jurisdiktion mit dem Namen Arius, der über einen nicht unbeträchtlichen logischen Scharfsinn verfügte und sich einbildete, dass der Bischof auf subtile Weise dieselbe Ansicht zu diesem Thema vertrat wie Sabellius der Libyer, vertrat aus Liebe zur Kontroverse die entgegengesetzte Meinung zu der des Libyers und antwortete, wie er meinte, energisch auf das, was der Bischof sagte. Wenn ", sagte er, "der Vater den Sohn gezeugt hat, so hatte der Gezeugte einen Anfang des Daseins; und daraus ist ersichtlich, dass es eine Zeit gab, in der der Sohn nicht war. Daraus folgt notwendigerweise, dass er seine Substanz aus dem Nichts hatte.
Übersetzung
ausblenden
Church History
Chapter V. The Dispute of Arius with Alexander, his Bishop.
After Peter, bishop of Alexandria, had suffered martyrdom under Diocletian, Achillas was installed in the episcopal office, whom Alexander succeeded, during the period of peace above referred to. He, in the fearless exercise of his functions for the instruction and government of the Church, attempted one day in the presence of the presbytery and the rest of his clergy, to explain, with perhaps too philosophical minuteness, that great theological mystery— the Unity *of the Holy Trinity. A certain one of the presbyters under his jurisdiction, whose name was Arius, possessed of no inconsiderable logical acumen, imagining that the bishop was subtly teaching the same view of this subject as Sabellius the Libyan, 1 from love of controversy took the opposite opinion to that of the Libyan, and as he thought vigorously responded to what was said by the bishop. ‘If,’ said he, ‘the Father begat the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence: and from this it is evident, that there was a time when the Son was not. It therefore necessarily follows, that he had his substance 2 from nothing.’
-
Though Sabellius was the originator of one of the earliest and most plausible attempts at explanation of the mystery of the Trinity (for which see life of Sabellius in Smith and Wace, Dict. of Christian Biog. , and Hodge, System. Theol. Vol. I. p. 452, 459), nothing is known of him, not even why he is called a Libyan here (also by other ancient writers, e.g. Philastrius, de Hæres. 26, and Asterius, quoted by Phot. Biblioth. Cod. 27). Some say that he was a native and resident of Libya, others that he was an ecclesiastic appointed to some position there; nor is it known whether the Libya meant is the Libyan Pentapolis or the Pentapolitan Ptolemais. ↩
-
ὑπόστασιν . Through the Arian controversy this word is used in its metaphysical sense of ‘real nature of a thing as underlying and supporting its outward form and properties’; hence it is equivalent to the Latin substantia, Eng. essence and Greek οὐσία . Cf. below III. 7. Later it was applied to the ‘special or characteristic nature of a thing,’ and so became the very opposite of οὐσία (the general nature); hence equivalent to *person. ↩