Marius Victorinus on Divine Nature and Substance

This article examines Marius Victorinus’ understanding of (divine) natura in relation to substantia , to determine whether he associated the term more closely with the Trinity as consubstantial, or with the three distinct persons. Recognizing interchangeability of divine “substance” and “nature” in late antiquity, scholars have recently argued that Victorinus’ defense of consubstantiality implied support for a single divine nature (alongside a single power), and anticipated (Pro-Nicene) Cappadocian arguments for divine unity. Close reading of citations of natura in the theological treatises uncovers some passages where it represents unity of substantia . However, passages associating natura with distinct divine persons ( subsistentiae ) are far more numerous. Use of Latin leads Victorinus to use natura with a degree of complexity that has not yet been recognized. Just as he accepted divine power as both “three” and “one,” he accepted divine nature as “three” and “one,” individual and collective

Biblical studies · Divine Providence · Interchangeability · Power (physics) · Reading (process) · Relation (database) · Byzantine Studies and History · Classical Philosophy and Thought · Religious, Philosophical, and Educational Studies