II.—A Section on the Writings of Pierius.10 From the Bibliotheca of Photius, cod. 119, p. 300, ed. Hoeschel.

Different Discourses of the Presbyter Pierius.

There was read a book by Pierius the presbyter, who, they say, endured the conflict11 Of martyrdom. for Christ, along with his brother Isidorus. And he is reputed to have been the teacher of the martyr Pamphilus in ecclesiastical studies, and to have been president of the school at Alexandria. The work contained twelve books.12 λόγους. And in style he is perspicuous and clear, with the easy flow, as it were, of a spoken address, displaying no signs of laboured art,13 ἐπιμελὲς ἐνδεικνύμενος. but bearing us quietly along, smoothly and gently, like off-hand speaking. And in argument he is most fertile, if any one is so. And he expresses his opinion on many things outside what is now established in the Church, perhaps in an antique manner;14 [e.g., his Platonic ideas, as explained in note 3, p. 156, supra.] but with respect to the Father and the Son, he sets forth his sentiments piously, except that he speaks of two substances and two natures; using, however, the terms substance and nature, as is apparent from what follows, and from what precedes this passage, in the sense of person15 ὐπόστασις. [See my remarks, vol. iv. p. v., introductory.] and not in the sense put on it by the adherents of Arius. With respect to the Spirit, however, he lays down his opinion in a very dangerous and far from pious manner. For he affirms that He is inferior to the Father and the Son in glory.16 [Photos must often be received with a grain of salt.] He has a passage also in the book17 εἰς τον λόγον. [On images, etc., Photius is no authority.] entitled, On the Gospel according to Luke, from which it is possible to show that the honour or dishonour of the image is also the honour or dishonour of the original. And, again, he indulges in some obscure speculations, after the manner of the nonsense of Origen, on the subject of the “pre-existence of souls.” And also in the book on the Passover (Easter) and on Hosea, he treats both of the cherubim made by Moses, and of the pillar of Jacob, in which passages he admits the actual construction of those things, but propounds the foolish theory that they were given economically, and that they were in no respect like other things which are made; inasmuch as they bore the likeness of no other form, but had only, as he foolishly says, the appearance of wings.18 The text here is evidently corrupt. It runs thus: οἰκονομίας δὲ λόγῳ συγχωρηθῆναι ματαιολογεῖ ὡς οὐδὲν ἦσαν ὡς ἕτερα τὰ γεγενημένα. ὡς οὐδὲ τυπον ἄλλον ἔφερε μορφῆς, ἀλλὰ μόνον πτερυγων κενολογεῖ φέρειν αὐτὰ σχῆμα. Hoeschelius proposes ὡς οὐδὲν ἦσαν, ὡς ἕτερον ἦσαν, ὡς ἕτερα, &c., and he rejects the ὡς in ὡς οὐδὲν τύπον on the authority of four codices.—Tr.