[Sidenote:  (3.) The words person and essence.]

The third subject before the council was an old misunderstanding about the term hypostasis.  It had been used in the Nicene anathemas as equivalent to ousia or essence; and so Athanasius used it still, to denote the common deity of all the persons of the Trinity.  So also the Latins understood it, as the etymological representative of substantia, which was their translation (a very bad one by the way) of ousia (essence).  Thus Athanasius and the Latins spoke of one hypostasis (essence) only.  Meantime the Easterns in general had adopted Origen’s limitation of it to the deity of the several persons of the Trinity in contrast with each other.  Thus they meant by it what the Latins called persona,[14] and rightly spoke of three hypostases (persons).  In this way East and West were at cross-purposes.  The Latins, who spoke of one hypostasis (essence), regarded the Eastern three hypostases as tritheist; while the Greeks, who confessed three hypostases (persons), looked on the Western one hypostasis as Sabellian.  As Athanasius had connections with both parties, he was a natural mediator.  As soon as both views were stated before the council, both were seen to be orthodox.  ‘One hypostasis’ (essence) was not Sabellian, neither was ‘three hypostases’ (persons) Arian.  The decision was that each party might keep its own usage.

[Footnote 14:  Persona, again, was a legal term, not exactly corresponding to its Greek representative.]

[Sidenote:  (4.) The schism at Antioch.]

Affairs at Antioch remained for discussion.  Now that Meletius was free to return, some decision had to be made.  The Eustathians had been faithful through thirty years of trouble, and Athanasius was specially bound to his old friends; yet, on the other hand, some recognition was due to the honourable confession of Meletius.  As the Eustathians had no bishop, the simplest course was for them to accept Meletius.  This was the desire of the council, and it might have been carried out if Lucifer had not taken advantage of his stay at Antioch to denounce Meletius as an associate of Arians.  By way of making the division permanent, he consecrated the presbyter Paulinus as bishop for the Eustathians.  When the mischief was done it could not be undone.  Paulinus added his signature to the decisions of Alexandria, but Meletius was thrown back on his old connection with Acacius.  Henceforth the rising Nicene party of Pontus and Asia was divided from the older Nicenes of Egypt and Rome by this unfortunate personal question.

[Sidenote:  Fourth exile of Athanasius.]