Overview
Tertullian and Sabellius represented two opposing trajectories. Tertullian was a Logos theologian and Sabellius developed from Monarchianism. Nevertheless. their theologies were similar:
Both taught that Father, Son, and Spirit are a single hypostasis, meaning, a single Existence.
But both distinguished between Father, Son, and Spirit within that single Existence.
Introduction
Books Quoted
| Hanson, R.P.C. – The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God – The Arian Controversy 318-381 (1987)
Ayres, Lewis, Nicaea and its legacy, 2004 |
Although I quote extensively from other authors, the conclusions are my own and not necessarily shared by these authors.
Hypostasis
The Greek church fathers used the word hypostasis for something distinct from other things, a distinct existence. So, to say that the Father, Son, and Spirit are three hypostases means they are three distinct Beings.
Logos-theology
In Tertullian’s time, Logos-theology and Monarchianism were two main views. Beginning in the second century, following Justin Martyr, Logos-theology dominated non-Jewish Christianity. It taught that the Logos existed through two stages: He always existed as an aspect of God, but became a distinct but subordinate hypostasis (Person) when God decided to create. (See – The Apologists.)
Monarchianism
Opposing Logos-theology, the Monarchians (also known as Modalism) believed that Father, Son, and Spirit are a single hypostasis. Specifically, they believed that ‘Father’ and ‘Son’ are two names for the same Person. Consequently, the Father suffered on the Cross.
Sabellianism
Sabellianism is named after the early third-century theologian Sabellius. Like the Monarchians, he explained the Father, Son, and Spirit as a single hypostasis (one Person).
However, there was an important difference between Sabellianism and Monarchianism. None of Sabellius’ writings have survived. Everything we know about him comes from the writings of his opponents, and we know that one’s enemies seldom reflect one’s views fairly. But Von Mosheim studied the available documents and concluded that Sabellius, while maintaining that Father, Son, and Spirit are one hypostasis (Person), opposed the Monarchian concept that Father and Son are simply two names for the same Person. Rather, he argued that Father, Son, and Spirit are three distinct forms, aspects, or portions of the one divine Person.
Arians
In the third century, Origen refined Logos theology but still taught that the Son is a distinct Existence. Following him, in the 4th century, the Arians professed three hypostases, meaning that the Father, Son, and Spirit are three distinct Existences. For example, the Arian Dedication Creed of 341 is important because it reveals the nature of Arianism without emperor-interference. It opposed Arius’ extreme teachings, but its main purpose was to oppose Sabellianism. For that purpose, while Sabellianism favored ‘one hypostasis’, it explicitly confesses three hypostases.
Tertullian
Did not oppose Sabellius.
Wikipedia states that Tertullian was “one of the chief critics of Sabellianism.” This was true only to the extent that Monarchianism and Sabellianism formed a single trajectory, but Tertullian (ca. 160–225) wrote slightly before Sabellius (fl. ca. 215) and did not oppose Sabellius directly. Tertullian’s enemy was Sabellius’ precursor – the Monarchians.
Was a Logos-theologian.
Tertullian is often praised as an accurate anticipation of Nicene theology. He did use the language of the Trinity doctrine: one substance, three Persons.
However, he believed that the Son and the Spirit are subordinate to the Father.
And, like Arius, he believed there was a time when the Son did not exist.
Consequently, he did not teach the Trinity doctrine. He was a typical Logos theologian. Consistent with Logos-theology, he taught that the Son or Logos was eternally within the being of the Father and only became distinct at a particular point for creation, revelation, and redemption.
Tertullian is regarded as important, not for his theology, but for introducing certain words that later became ‘orthodox, particularly the terms ‘trinity’, ‘substance’, and ‘person’.
Personae
So, what did Tertullian mean by “three personae?” Are they forms, aspects, or portions of one hypostasis, as Sabellius proposed, or did he understand Father, Son, and Spirit to be really distinct, like three Persons with three distinct minds? The following shows that Tertullian believed that the Father, Son, and Spirit are a single hypostasis (a single Person with a single mind):
The Son is a portion of the Father.
The entire substance is a single discrete entity, meaning one hypostasis.
The Logos became more clearly distinguished but remained part of the Father.
Therefore, Tertullian’s ‘Persons were not ‘Persons’ in the sense of distinct Beings with distinct minds. This is also how other theologians used the term. Sabellius (Basil, Epistle 210.5.36–41, Hanson p. 328) and the Sabelian Paulinians (Anatolios, p. 27) used the term for the Father and Son. It is sometimes translated as ‘persons,’ but it means “role” (Hanson, p. 649), “character or part (almost as in a play)” (Hanson, p. 692), or “role or manifestation” (Anatolios, p. 27). Basil regarded πρόσωπον (prosopon) “as less appropriate, too close to Sabellianism” (Ayres, p. 210).
Similar to the Sabellius
Although Sabellius and Tertullian represented two different trajectories, their theologies were similar: Tertullian was a Logos theologian, but the Monarchians criticized the Logos theologians for teaching that they divide the one God into two Gods. Tertullian developed his peculiar theology to overcome that criticism. He deviated from the standard Logos theory and described God as “three personae” in one substance. Therefore, like Sabellius, the Son is not a distinct existence, but both Sabellius and Tertullian were able to identify the Father and Son within that single existence.
Nicene Theology
It seems as if the Western pro-Nicenes of the fourth century continued Tertullian’s understanding. Both Alexander and Athanasius described the Father, Son, and Spirit as a single hypostasis, with the Logos intrinsic to the being of the Father.
And the manifesto compiled by the Western delegates at the Council of Serdica, which is the only Western (Nicene) creed from the fourth century that was not emperor-manipulated, explicitly confesses one hypostasis.
Conclusion
Wikipedia states that Tertullian was “one of the chief critics of Sabellianism,” but this article argued that It is valid to classify Tertullian as a Sabellian if we define Sabellianism as teaching that Father, Son, and Spirit are only one Person within whom the Father, Son, and Spirit are somehow distinguished.