A Further Usage of the Word Homousios in Latin: Lexicographical Observations

Abstract

1 ACTA CLASSICA LXV (2021) 1–10 ISSN 0065–1141 A FURTHER USAGE OF THE WORD HOMOUSIOS IN LATIN: LEXICOGRAPHICAL OBSERVATIONS* Matteo Rajola University of Naples, Federico II Pre-Nicene uses of the term homousios From the fourth century on, the word homousios, meaning ‘consubstantial’, appears to be indissolubly intertwined with Christian doctrinal thinking and the need to define the ontological bonds between God the Father and God the Son.1 The word officially entered the ‘technical’ language of Christianity at the time of the Council of Nicaea (AD 325);2 from then on this term, borrowed from Greek, was widely used in Latin works, as we can see in a number of doctrinal and dogmatic texts. But even before the fourth century, homousios was used to refer to the notion of consubstantiality thanks to the significant contribution of Gnosticism .3 However, Beatrice notes that, in paganism, the use of the word homousios in relation to the speculation about the essence of the divine (consisting in Nous and Logos, that is a god-father and a god-son) is systematically explained only in the Poimandres, the first of the essays contained in the Egyptian Corpus Hermeticum.4 There are also five oracles of the same origin, quoted in the first Book of the Theosophy of an anonymous Monophysite 5 dealing with the same theological matters as the Poimandres, including the term homousios, to define the relationship between NousFather and Logos-Son, with the addition of Pneuma-Spirit to complete the * I would like to thank Alessia Avecone, the editor of Acta Classica, and the journal’s readers for their helpful comments and advice in the preparation of this article. 1 There is a rich bibliography regarding the term homousios and the Trinitarian matters related to it. We will just mention here a few contributions made later than the year 2000: Beatrice 2002; Weinandy 2011; Switala 2014. 2 Beatrice 2002:248. On the Council of Nicaea, see Edwards 2009:84–89; Scheck 2010:22–23; Calhoun 2011:194. 3 Grillmeier 1975; Beatrice 2002:248. 4 Beatrice 2002:257. The Corpus Hermeticum is a collection of philosophical-religious works dating to the 2ⁿᵈ or 3ʳᵈ century: Ehmer 2021. 5 A work in four books containing a final world chronicle (beginning of the 6ᵗʰ century). See the critical edition of Beatrice 2001. Rajola 2 picture of the Trinity. Therefore Beatrice concludes that the root of the specifically Christian meaning of the word homousios is to be found in the context of Roman-Hellenistic pagan Egypt and not in that of Gnosticism, where the usage of this word seems to have a looser semantic connection with that found in Christianity to define the ontological bonds between the Father and the Son.6 Homousios may also have been used in a Trinitarian sense before the Council of Nicaea. According to Beatrice, the use of homousios in a strictly Trinitarian sense cannot be inferred from a passage by Clement of Alexandria in which it is stated that the Logos is one with the Father due to sameness of substance:7 Sicut etiam verbum ipsum (hoc est filius), quod secundum aequalitatem substantiae unum cum patre constitit, sempiternum est et infectum (‘So the Word itself (namely the Son), that proved to be one with the Father due to the sameness of their substance, is eternal and without end.’) 8 Beatrice also points out that a passage from Origen of Alexandria’s lost Commentary on Hebrews,9 which survived in a Latin translation made by Rufinus,10 is similar to a passage from the same author’s De principiis, which likewise survived in a Latin translation.11 In both passages homousios is used in an analogical sense rather than as an attempt to define the ontological 6 Ibid. 264–69. Beatrice also devotes a section to the relationship between Emperor Constantine and the pagan and hermetic tradition of Egypt with regard to the Nicene Creed. 7 This passage is part of the Adumbrationes Clementis Alexandrini in epistolas canonicas, a fragment of a Latin translation commissioned by Cassiodorus (5ᵗʰ-6ᵗʰ century, ed. Stählin et al. 1970). Despite the risks of such a statement, this fragment was believed by various...