from the very beginning, as is witnessed by its symbols and other incontrovertible proofs.”
From what beginning remains unknown. But from common sense, from the historical data, even from the exposition given here and in Art. 28 of the different opposing opinions, it is evident that there was no such beginning, and that the dogma was formed by degrees. Then follows a confirmation of the fact that the dogma was not formed in an indefinite “very beginning,” but at a very definite historical period of church history.
“But the manner of expression of this truth in the first centuries was unequal even among the Orthodox teachers of the faith. Some used the words οὐσία, φύσις, substantia, natura, in order to signify the essence or substance of God; others, however only few of them and rarely, used these words to designate the divine persons. Similarly, certain words, ὑπόστασις, ὕπαρξις, or τρόπος υπάρξεως, designated the persons in God; others, on the contrary, designated by these words the essence of God, and for the designation of the persons used the words πρόσωπος, persona. The different use of the word hypostasis’ has even led to considerable disputes in the East, especially at Antioch, and for some time created discord between the Eastern and the Western churches, of which the first taught that it was necessary to profess three hypostases in God, fearing a reproach of Sabellianism, while the others affirmed that there was but one hypostasis in God, fearing a reproach of Arianism. To solve the misunderstanding a council was called in Alexandria (in the year 362), where, together with St. Athanasius the Great, there were present bishops from Italy, Arabia, Egypt, and Libya. At the council, the representatives of both parties were heard, and it turned out that both sides believed precisely alike, differing only in words, both the Orthodox and those who said, In God there is one essence and three hypostases, and the others who said, ‘In God is one hypostasis
