[469] Probably Lucius, Bishop of Hadrianople, who had been deposed by the Arians, and appealed to Julius, who wished to right him. Still kept out by the Arians, he appealed to the Council of Sardica, and, in accordance with its decree, Constantius ordered his restoration (Soc. ii. 26). Cf. Chap. XII.
[470] Bishop of Trajanopolis (Ath. Hist. Ar. 19).
[471] The strange story of Ischyras is gathered from notices in the Apol. c. Arian. Without ordination, he started a small conventicle of some half-dozen people, and the Alexandrian Synod of 324 condemned his pretensions. The incident of the text may be assigned to 329. He afterwards faced both ways, to Athanasius and the Eusebians, and was recognised by them as a bishop. Dict. Christ. Biog. iii. 302.
[472] Georgius succeeded the Arian Theodotus, of whom mention has already been made (p. 42), in the see of the Syrian Laodicea (Latakia). Athanasius (de fug. §26), speaks of his "dissolute life, condemned even by his own friends."
[473] Known as ho monophthalmos, "The one-eyed." He succeeded the Historian Eusebius in the see of Cæsarea in 340, and the Nicomedian Eusebius as a leader of the Arian Court party in 342.
[474] Now Belgrade.
[475] Now Esseg on the Drave. Here Constantius defeated Magnentius, a.d. 351.
[476] Bishop of Petra in Palestine. (Tomus ad Antioch. 10.) There is some confusion in the names of the sees, and a doubt whether there were really two Petras. Cf. Reland, Palestine, p. 298, Le Quien, East. Christ. iii. 665, 666.
[477] Bishop of Petra in Arabia, (Ath. Hist. Ar. 18, Apol. cont. Ar. 48).
[478] Cf. Acts xx. 29
[479] Thrust on the see of Gaza by the Arians on the deposition of Asclepas (Soz. iii. 8, 12).
[480] Gal. i. 8
[481] Here, according to the Version of Athanasius (Ap. cont. Ar. 49), the Synodical Epistle ends. An argument against the genuineness of the addition is the introduction of a new formula of faith, while from the letter of Athanasius "ex synodo Alexandrinâ ad legatos apostolicæ sedis,"" it is plain that nothing was added to the Nicene Creed. (Labbe iii. 84.)
[482] This passage is very corrupt: the translation follows the Greek of Valesius, gennetos estin hama kai genetos. It is not certain that the distinction between agennetos "unbegotten," and agenetos, "uncreate," was in use quite so early as 344. If the passage is spurious and of later date, the distinction might be more naturally found.
[483] hupostaseis
[484] ousia
[485] John xiv. 10
[486] John x. 30
[487] Wisdom vii. 22
[488] John i. 3
[489] hupostasis
[490] This translation follows the reading of the Allatian Codex, adopted by Valesius, te kaine ktisei. If we read koine for kaine, we must render "excels or differs in relation to the common creation" which He shares with man.
[491] hupostasis
[492] John x. 30
[493] hupostasis
[494] John xvii. 21
[495] oikonomia. In classical Greek oikonomia is simply the management (a) of a household, (b) of the state. In the N.T. we have it in Luke xvi. for "stewardship," and in five other places; (i) 1 Cor. ix. 17, A.V. "dispensation," R.V. "stewardship;" (ii) Eph. i. 10 A.V. and R.V. "dispensation;" (iii) Eph. iii. 2, A.V. and R.V. "dispensation;" (iv) Col. i. 25, A.V. and R.V. "dispensation;" (v) 1 Tim. i. 4, where A.V. adopts the inferior reading oikodomen, and R.V. renders the oikonomian of 'AFGKLP by "dispensation." Suicer gives as the meanings of the word (i) ministerium evangelii, (ii) providentia et numen quo Dei sapientia omnia moderatur, (iii) ipsa Christi naturæ humanæ assumptio, (iv) totius redemptionis mysterium et passionis Christi Sacramentum. Theodoret himself (Ed. Migne iv. 93) says ten enanthropesin de tou Theou Logou kaloumen oikonomian, and quaintly distinguishes (Cant. Cant. p. 83) he smurna kai ho libanos toutestin he theologia te kai oikonomia. On a phrase of St. Ignatius (Eph. xviii.), "ho christos ekuophorethe hupo Marias kat' oikonomian," Bp. Lightfoot (Apostolic Fathers, II. p. 75 note) writes: "The word oikonomia came to be applied more especially to the Incarnation because this was par excellence the system or plan which God had ordained for the government of His household and the dispensation of His stores. Hence in the province of theology, oikonomia was distinguished by the Fathers from theologia proper, the former being the teaching which was concerned with the Incarnation and its consequences, and the latter the teaching which related to the Eternal and Divine nature of Christ. The first step towards this special appropriation of oikonomia to the Incarnation is found in St. Paul; e.g. Ephes. i. 10, eis oikonomian tou pleromatos ton kairon....In this passage of Ignatius it is moreover connected with the reserve' of God (xix. en hesuchi& 139; theou eprachthe). Thus economy' has already reached its first stage on the way to the sense of dissimulation,' which was afterwards connected with it, and which led to disastrous consequences in the theology and practice of a later age." Cf. Newman's Arians, chap. i. sec. 3.