A Brighter Day Begins with His Word.

Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series • VOL 4 • SECTION 245

And in the Holy Ghost, whom the Only-begotten Son of God Himself, Christ, our Lord and God, promised to send to the race of man, as Paraclet

← Athanasius — Select Works and Letters

And in the Holy Ghost, whom the Only-begotten Son of God Himself, Christ, our Lord and God, promised to send to the race of man, as Paraclete, as it is written, the Spirit of truth' (Joh. xvi. 13), which He sent unto them when He had ascended into the heavens.

But the name of Essence,' which was set down by the Fathers in simplicity, and, being unknown by the people, caused offence, because the Scriptures contain it not, it has seemed good to abolish, and for the future to make no mention of it at all; since the divine Scriptures have made no mention of the Essence of Father and Son. For neither ought Subsistence to be named concerning Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. But, we say that the Son is Like the Father, as the divine Scriptures say and teach; and all the heresies, both those which have been afore condemned already, and whatever are of modern date, being contrary to this published statement, be they anathema [3596] .

31. However, they did not stand even to this: for coming down from Constantinople to Antioch, they were dissatisfied that they had written at all that the Son was Like the Father, as the Scriptures say;' and putting their ideas upon paper [3597] , they began reverting to their first doctrines, and said that the Son is altogether unlike the Father,' and that the Son is in no manner like the Father,' and so much did they change, as to admit those who spoke the Arian doctrine nakedly and to deliver to them the Churches with licence to bring forward the words of blasphemy with impunity [3598] . Because then of the extreme shamelessness of their blasphemy they were called by all Anomoeans, having also the name of Exucontian [3599] , and the heretical Constantius for the patron of their irreligion, who persisting up to the end in irreligion, and on the point of death, thought good to be baptized [3600] ; not however by religious men, but by Euzoius [3601] , who for his Arianism had been deposed, not once, but often, both when he was a deacon, and when he was in the see of Antioch.

32. The forementioned parties then had proceeded thus far, when they were stopped and deposed. But well I know, not even under these circumstances will they stop, as many as have now dissembled, [3602] but they will always be making parties against the truth, until they return to themselves and say, Let us rise and go to our fathers, and we will say unto them, We anathematize the Arian heresy, and we acknowledge the Nicene Council;' for against this is their quarrel. Who then, with ever so little understanding, will bear them any longer? who, on hearing in every Council some things taken away and others added, but perceives that their mind is shifty and treacherous against Christ? who on seeing them embodying to so great a length both their professions of faith, and their own exculpation, but sees that they are giving sentence against themselves, and studiously writing much which may be likely by their officious display and abundance of words to seduce the simple and hide what they are in point of heresy? But as the heathen, as the Lord said, using vain words in their prayers (Mat. vi. 7), are nothing profited; so they too, after all this outpouring, were not able to quench the judgment pronounced against the Arian heresy, but were convicted and deposed instead; and rightly; for which of their formularies is to be accepted by the hearer? or with what confidence shall they be catechists to those who come to them? for if they all have one and the same meaning, what is the need of many? But if need has arisen of so many, it follows that each by itself is deficient, not complete; and they establish this point better than we can, by their innovating on them all and remaking them. And the number of their Councils, and the difference of their statements is a proof that those who were present at them, while at variance with the Nicene, are yet too feeble to harm the Truth.

[3502] Cf. Orat. i. §§2-5; de Sent. D. 6; Socr. i. 9. The Arian Philostorgius tells us that Arius wrote songs for the sea and for the mill and for the road, and then set them to suitable music,' Hist. ii. 2. It is remarkable that Athanasius should say the Egyptian Sotades, and again in Sent. D. 6. There were two Poets of the name; one a writer of the Middle Comedy, Athen. Deipn. vii. 11; but the other, who is here spoken of, was a native of Maronea in Crete, according to Suidas (in voc.), under the successors of Alexander, Athen. xiv. 4. He wrote in Ionic metre, which was of infamous name from the subjects to which he and others applied it. vid. Suid. ibid. Horace's Ode. Miserarum est neque amori, &c.' is a specimen of this metre, and some have called it Sotadic; but Bentley shews in loc. that Sotades wrote in the Ionic a majore. Athenæus implies that all Ionic metres were called Sotadic, or that Sotades wrote in various Ionic metres. The Church adopted the Doric music, and forbade the Ionic and Lydian. The name Thalia' commonly belonged to convivial songs; Martial contrasts the lasciva Thalia' with carmina sanctiora,' Epigr. vii. 17. vid. Thaliarchus, the master of the feast,' Horat. Od. i. 9. [The metre of the fragments of the Thalia' is obscure, there are no traces of the Ionic foot, but very distinct anapæstic cadences. In fact the lines resemble ill-constructed or very corrupt anapæstic tetrameters catalectic, as in a comic Parabasis. For Sotades, the Greek text here reads corruptly Sosates.]

[3503] This passage ought to have been added supr. p. 163, note 8, as containing a more direct denial of the homoousion

[3504] That is, Wisdom, or the Son, is but the disciple of Him who is Wise, and not the attribute by which He is Wise, which is what the Sabellians said, vid. Orat. iv. §2, and what Arius imputed to the Church.

[3505] anepimiktoi, that is, he denied the perichoresis, vid. supr. Orat. iii. 3, &c.

[3506] [John i. 18, best mss., and cf. Hort, Two Diss. p. 26.

[3507] epinoiais, that is, our Lord's titles are but names, or figures, not properly belonging to Him, but [cf. Bigg. B. L. p. 168 sq.]

[3508] kata katalepsin, that is, there is nothing comprehensible in the Father for the Son to know and declare. On the other hand the doctrine of the Anomoeans was, that all men could know Almighty God perfectly.

[3509] [The ordinary title of eminent bishops, especially of the bishop of Alexandria.]

[3510] What the Valentinian probole was is described in Epiph. Hær. 31, 13 [but see D.C.B. iv. 1086 sqq.] Origen protests against the notion of probole, Periarch. iv. p. 190, and Athanasius Expos. §1. The Arian Asterius too considers probole to introduce the notion of teknogonia, Euseb. contr. Marc. i. 4. p. 20. vid. also Epiph. Hær. 72. 7. Yet Eusebius uses the word proballesthai. Eccl. Theol. i. 8. On the other hand Tertullian uses it with a protest against the Valentinian sense. Justin has problethen gennema, Tryph. 62. And Nazianzen calls the Almighty Father proboleus of the Holy Spirit. Orat. 29. 2. Arius introduces the word here as an argumentum ad invidiam. Hil. de Trin. vi. 9.

[3511] The Manichees adopting a material notion of the divine substance, considered that it was divisible, and that a portion of it was absorbed by the power of darkness.

[3512] huiopatora. The term is ascribed to Sabellius, Ammon. in Caten. Joan. i. 1. p. 14: to Sabellius and [invidiously to] Marcellus, Euseb. Eccl. Theol. ii. 5: Cf., as to Marcellus, Cyr. Hier. Catech. xv. 9. also iv. 8. xi. 16; Epiph. Hær. 73. 11 fin.: to Sabellians, Athan. Expos. Fid. 2. and 7, and Greg. Nyssen. contr. Eun. xii. p. 733: to certain heretics, Cyril. Alex. in Joann. p. 243: to Praxeas and Montanus, Mar. Merc. p. 128: to Sabellius, Cæsar. Dial. i. p. 550: to Noetus, Damasc. Hær. 57.

[3513] [On Hieracas, see D.C.B. iii. 24; also Epiph. Hær. 67; Hil. Trin. vi. 12.]

[3514] Bull considers that the doctrine of such Fathers is here spoken of as held that our Lord's sunkatabasis to create the world was a gennesis, and certainly such language as that of Hippol. contr. Noet. §15. favours the supposition. But one class of [Monarchians] may more probably be intended, who held that the Word became the Son upon His incarnation, such as Marcellus, vid. Euseb. Eccles. Theol. i. 1. contr. Marc. ii. 3. vid. also Eccles. Theol. ii. 9. p. 114 b. med' allote allen k.t.l. Also the Macrostich says, We anathematize those who call Him the mere Word of God, not allowing Him to be Christ and Son of God before all ages, but from the time He took on Him our flesh: such are the followers of Marcellus and Photinus, &c.' infr. §26. Again, Athanasius, Orat. iv. 15, says that, of those who divide the Word from the Son, some called our Lord's manhood the Son, some the two Natures together, and some said that the Word Himself became the Son when He was made man.' It makes it more likely that Marcellus is meant, that Asterius seems to have written against him before the Nicene Council, and that Arius in other of his writings borrowed from Asterius. vid. de Decret. §8.

[3515] Eusebius's letter to Euphration, which is mentioned just after, expresses this more distinctly--If they coexist, how shall the Father be Father and the Son Son? or how the One first, the Other second? and the One ingenerate and the other generate?' Acta Conc. 7. p. 301. The phrase ta pros ti Bull well explains to refer to the Catholic truth that the Father or Son being named; the Other is therein implied without naming. Defens. F. N. iii. 9. §4. Hence Arius, in his Letter to Eusebius, complains that Alexander says, aei ho theos, aei ho hui& 231;s hama pater, hama hui& 231;s. Theod. H. E. i. 4.

[3516] heko, and so Chrys. Hom. 3. Hebr. init. Epiph. Hær. 73. 31, and 36.

[3517] Most of these original Arians were attacked in a work of Marcellus's which Eusebius answers. Now he replies to Asterius,' says Eusebius, now to the great Eusebius' [of Nicomedia], and then he turns upon that man of God, that indeed thrice blessed person Paulinus [of Tyre]. Then he goes to war with Origen....Next he marches out against Narcissus, and pursues the other Eusebius,' [himself]. In a word, he counts for nothing all the Ecclesiastical Fathers, being satisfied with no one but himself.' contr. Marc. i. 4. [On Maris (who was not at Ariminum, and scarcely at Antioch in 363) see D.C.B. s.v. (2). On Theodotus see vol. i. of this series, p. 320, note 37. On Paulinus, ib. p. 369.]

[3518] [Of Balaneæ, see Ap. Fug. 3; Hist. Ar. 5.]

[3519] Quoted, among other passages from Eusebius, in the 7th General Council, Act. 6. p. 409. [Mansi. xiii. 701 D]. The Son Himself is God, but not Very God.' [But see Prolegg. ubi supr. note 5].

[3520] Asterius has been mentioned above, p. 155, note 2, &c. Philostorgius speaks of him as adopting Semi-Arian terms; and Acacius gives an extract from him containing them, ap. Epiph. Hær. 72. 6. He seems to be called many-headed with an allusion to the Hydra, and to his activity in the Arian cause and his fertility in writing. He wrote comments on Scripture. [See Prolegg. ii. §3 (2) a, sub. fin.]

[3521] None but the clergy might enter the Chancel, i.e. in Service time. Hence Theodosius was made to retire by S. Ambrose. Theod. v. 17. The Council of Laodicea, said to be held a.d. 372, forbids any but persons in orders, hieratikoi, to enter the Chancel and then communicate. Can. 19. vid. also 44. Conc. t. i. pp. 788, 789. It is doubtful what orders the word hieratikoi is intended to include. vid. Bingham, Antiqu. viii. 6. §7.

[3522] Ep. Æg. 13.

[3523] Vid. infr. §32.

[3524] [On Artemas or Artemon and Theodotus, see Prolegg. ii. §3 (2) a.]

[3525] [See Apol. Ar. 84; Hist. Ar. 1; Prolegg. ii. §5. The first part of the letter will be found supr. Apol. Ar. p. 144.]

[3526] This is supposed to be the same Confession which is preserved by Socr. i. 26. and Soz. ii. 27. and was presented to Constantine by Arius in 330.

[3527] [Prolegg. ch. ii. §6 (2).]

[3528] 1st Confession or 1st of Antioch, a.d. 341. [See Socr. ii. 10.]

[3529] 2nd Confession or 2nd of Antioch, a.d. 341. This formulary is that known as the Formulary of the Dedication. It is quoted as such by Socr. ii. 39, 40. Soz. iv. 15. and infr. §29. [On its attribution to Lucian, see Prolegg. ubi supr., and Caspari Alte. u. Neue Q. p. 42 note.]

[3530] Vid. 10th Confession, infr. §30.

[3531] These strong words and those which follow, whether Lucian's or not, mark the great difference between this confession and the foregoing. The words unalterable and unchangeable' are formal anti-Arian symbols, as the trepton or alterable was one of the most characteristic parts of Arius's creed. vid. Orat. i. §35, &c.

Historical source

Public Domain • Christian Classics Ethereal Library source edition.

Source record →