[1221] Macedonius had been a very eminent Semi-Arian doctor. He was deposed from the See of Constantinople, A.D. 360: and it was actually the influence of the Eunomians that brought this about. He went into exile and formed his sect. He considered the Holy Spirit as "a divine energy diffused throughout the universe: and not a person distinct from the Father and the Son" (Socrates, H. E. iv. 4). This opinion had many partizans in the Asiatic provinces, "but," says Mosheim, "the Council of Constantinople crushed it." However, that the final clauses of the Nicene Creed which express distinctly, amongst other truths, the deity and personality of the Third Person of the Trinity were added at that Council to the original form, is extremely doubtful. For--1. We find the expanded form which we now use in the Nicene Creed, in a work written by Epiphanius seven years before the Council of Constantinople. So that at all events the enlarged Creed was not prepared by the Fathers then assembled. 2. It is extremely doubtful if any symbol at all was set forth at Constantinople. Neither Socrates, nor Sozomen, nor Theodoret makes mention of one: but all speak of adherence to the evangelic faith ratified at Nicæa. It is significant too that the expanded form was entirely ignored by the Council of Ephesus, 431. But at the Council of Chalcedon, 451, it was brought forward: though even then it appears that it was far from attaining general acceptance. By 540 it had become the accepted form (according to a letter of Pope Vigilius). "It seems most likely therefore that it was a profession received amongst the churches in the patriarchate of Constantinople, but at first not more widely circulated" (J. R. Lumby, Commentary on Prayer-Book, S. P. C. K., p. 66) F. J. A. Hort, however, (see Two Dissertations by) regards this "Constantinopolitan" Creed as the old Creed of Jerusalem enlarged and expanded; and he suggests that S. Cyril of Jerusalem may have produced it before the Council, which gave it some sort of approval. The addition, moreover, of the later clauses was not, as Mosheim seems to imagine, the only difference between the Nicene Creed and this Creed. That this lateness of accepted definition on a vital point should not excite our wonder, Neander shows "the apprehension of the idea (of the homoousion of the Holy Spirit) had been so little permeated as yet by the Christian consciousness of the unity of God, that Gregory of Nazianzum could still say in 380, Some of our theologians consider the Holy Spirit to be a certain mode of the Divine energy, others a creature of God, others God Himself. Others say they do not know which opinion they ought to accept, out of reverence for the Scriptures which have not clearly explained this point.' Hilary of Poictiers says in his own original way that he was well aware that nothing could be foreign to God's nature, which searches into the deep things of that nature. Should one be displeased at being told that He exists by and through Him, by and from Whom are all things, that He is the Spirit of God, but also God's gift to believers, then will the apostles and prophets displease him; for they affirm only that He exists.'" There can be little doubt, however, that Gregory, in the following fragment, is defending a statement already in existence. He seems even to follow the order of the words, "Lord and giver of Life." "Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified." Doubtless the next clause, "Who spake by the Prophets," was dealt with in what is lost. But, essentially a creed-maker as he was, his claim to have himself added these final clauses cannot be substantiated. For the mss. of this treatise, see p. 31.
[1222] sepedonodes...gangraina: both used by Galen.
[1223] eis asebeian graphein. This is Mai's reading. Cf. asebeias graphe. The active (instead of middle) in this sense is found in Aristoph. Av. 1052: the passive is not infrequent in Demosthenes and Æschines.
[1224] From God, and of the Christ, according to Scripture. This is noticeable. The Greek is ek tou Theou esti, kai tou Christou esti, kathos gegraptai. Compare the words below "proceeding from the Father, receiving from the Son."
[1225] to aparallakton (but there is something lost before this: perhaps to henomenon). This word is used to express substantial identity. Origen uses it in alluding to the "Stoic resurrection," i.e. the time when the "Great Year" shall again begin, and the world's history be literally repeated, i.e. the "identical Socrates shall marry the identical Xantippe, and teach the identical philosophy, &c." This expression was a favourite one also with Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria to express the identity of Glory, of Godhead, and of Honour, in the Blessed Trinity.
[1226] Reading moriois (cf. the same word below) for morian.
[1227] pros ten enantian poioteta.
[1228] nimble, kouphon; compare Macbeth, I. vi. "The air Nimbly and sweetly recommends itself Unto our senses."
[1229] Reading eusebos.
[1230] Reading idion gar touto.
[1231] Reading elattoseos tinos e kata phusin parallages, k. t. l.
[1232] "The Ancient Greek Fathers, speaking of this procession, mention the Father only, and never, I think, express the Son, as sticking constantly in this to the language of the Scriptures (John xv. 26)"--Pearson. The language of the above simile of Gregory would be an illustration of this. So Greg. Naz., Orat. I. de Filio, "standing on our definitions, we introduce the Ungenerate, the Generated, and that which proceeds from the Father." This last expression was so known and public, that it is recorded even by Lucian in his Philopatris, §12.
[1233] Reading kai tes eusebous ennoias.
[1234] The edition of Cardinal Mai has ho ekeino dous te dunamei, sunomologese, k. t. l. But the sense requires the comma to be placed after dous.
[1235] Reading to ephexes.
[1236] ephexes.
[1237] Reading homologeis
[1238] i.e.from fellowship with the Spirit. The text is tis ho logos kath' hon eulogon krinousin patera anairein, dedokasi; (for which dedokosi is a conjecture). But perhaps pneuma anairein, didaskosi, or didaxosi, would be a more intelligible reading; though the examples of the hortatory subjunctive other than in the first person are, according to Porson (ad Eurip. Hec. 430), to be reckoned among solecisms in classical Greek.
[1239] Is. xl. 15. But Mai's text has stathmos, not stagon (LXX.).
[1240] Ps. xix. 1.
[1241] Is. xl. 12. Tis emetrjse...ton ouranon spithame.
[1242] lambanomenon
[1243] pistos. 2 Tim. ii. 13.
[1244] S. John i. 3
[1245] pro pases kataleptes epinoias.
[1246] 1 Cor. xiii. 6.
[1247] kata to agathon; probably here in its Platonic, rather than its ordinary sense.
[1248] ten alethe morphosin tes eusebeias
[1249] entithetai: suntithetai, "concedes to," would perhaps be better.
[1250] 2 Cor. xiii. 11. Cf. 1 Cor. xiv. 20.
[1251] Cf. 2 Tim. i. 13 (hupotuposin); Rom. ii. 20 (morphosin); vi. 17 (tupon), all referring to truth as contained in a formula. Cf. also Gal. iv. 19.
[1252] Reading kathos ekeinos phesin.
[1253] Eccles. xi. 5 (LXX.). ouk esti ginoskon tis he hodos tou pneumatos, hos osta en gastri kuophorouses
[1254] Acts x. 38. Cf. iv. 27.
[1255] 2 Cor. iii. 14, 15.
[1256] ek tou periechontos. This expression of Anaxagoras is repeated more than once in the Treatise "On the Soul."
[1257] idiotiken. On 1 Cor. xiv. 16, O anapleron ton topon tou idiotou, Theodoret says, "idioten kalei ton en to laiko tagmati tetagmenon." Theophylact also renders the word by the same equivalent.
[1258] "Whether or not the Macedonians explicitly denied the Divinity of the Holy Ghost is uncertain; but they viewed Him as essentially separate from, and external to, the One Indivisible Godhead. The Nicene' Creed declares that He is the Lord, or Sovereign Spirit because the heretics considered Him to be a minister of God; and the Supreme Giver of Life, because they considered Him a mere instrument by which we receive the gift."--Newman's Arians, note p. 420.
[1259] katakrisin
[1260] kata tou nomothetou is Mai's reading. But kata ton nomotheten, i.e. according to S. Mark iii. 29, S. Luke xii. 10, would be preferable. Migne reads para in this sense.
[1261] to has probably dropped out.
[1262] te gnosei heautou.
[1263] Something has dropped out here.
[1264] epiballouses. Cf. Ps. xcix. 5; 2 Chron. xxviii. 2.
[1265] Wisdom xvi. 14.
[1266] biotikes apates.
[1267] It is worth noticing that Gregory maintains (Hom. xv. on Canticles) that Doxa in Scripture means the Holy Ghost.
[1268] Cf. 1 Sam. ii. 30.
[1269] S. John xvii. 4
[1270] S. John xvii. 5
[1271] S. John xii. 28
[1272] kalon.
[1273] Deut. vi. 13; x. 20.
[1274] The LXX. has prosekunesen epi ten gen heptakis, Gen. xxxiii. 3.
[1275] prosekunese to lao tes ges, tois huiois tou Chet, Gen. xxiii. 7.
[1276] tou biou. This is a late use of bios.
[1277] Still the word proskunein became consecrated to the highest Christian worship while therapeuein was employed for address to the angels. "Every supplication, every prayer, every entreaty, and every giving of thanks must be offered to the Almighty through the High Priest who is over all the angels, the incarnate Word and God. And we shall make supplication and prayer to the Word Himself also, and we shall give Him thanks if we can distinguish prayer in its proper meaning from the wrong use of the word," Origen c. Cels. v. 4 (Cf. viii. 13, where he answers the question whether Gabriel, Michael, and the rest of the archangels should be addressed, therapeuesthai).
On the Holy Trinity, and of the Godhead of the Holy Spirit.
To Eustathius [1278] .
------------------------
All you who study medicine have, one may say, humanity for your profession: and I think that one who preferred your science to all the serious pursuits of life would form the proper judgment, and not miss the right decision, if it be true that life, the most valued of all things, is a thing to be shunned, and full of pain, if it may not be had with health, and health your art supplies. But in your own case the science is in a notable degree of double efficacy; you enlarge for yourself the bounds of its humanity, since you do not limit the benefit of your art to men's bodies, but take thought also for the cure of troubles of the mind. I say this, not only following the common reports, but because I have learnt it from experience, as in many other matters, so especially at this time in this indescribable malice of our enemies, which you skilfully dispersed when it swept like some evil flood over our life, dispelling this violent inflammation of our heart by your fomentation of soothing words. I thought it right, indeed, in view of the continuous and varied effort of our enemies against us, to keep silence, and to receive their attack quietly, rather than to speak against men armed with falsehood, that most mischievous weapon, which sometimes drives its point even through truth. But you did well in urging me not to betray the truth, but to refute the slanderers, lest, by a success of falsehood against truth, many might be injured.
I may say that those who conceived this causeless hatred for us seemed to be acting very much on the principle of Æsop's fable. For just as he makes his wolf bring some charges against the lamb (feeling ashamed, I suppose, of seeming to destroy, without just pretext, one who had done him no hurt), and then, when the lamb easily swept away all the slanderous charges brought against him, makes the wolf by no means slacken his attack, but carry the day with his teeth when he is vanquished by justice; so those who were as keen for hatred against us as if it were something good (feeling perhaps some shame of seeming to hate without cause), make up charges and complaints against us, while they do not abide consistently by any of the things they say, but allege, now that one thing, after a little while that another, and then again that something else is the cause of their hostility to us. Their malice does not take a stand on any ground, but when they are dislodged from one charge they cling to another, and from that again they seize upon a third, and if all their charges are refuted they do not give up their hate. They charge us with preaching three Gods, and din into the ears of the multitude this slander, which they never rest from maintaining persuasively. Then truth fights on our side, for we show both publicly to all men, and privately to those who converse with us, that we anathematize any man who says that there are three Gods, and hold him to be not even a Christian. Then, as soon as they hear this, they find Sabellius a handy weapon against us, and the plague that he spread is the subject of continual attacks upon us. Once more, we oppose to this assault our wonted armour of truth, and show that we abhor this form of heresy just as much as Judaism. What then? are they weary after such efforts, and content to rest? Not at all. Now they charge us with innovation, and frame their complaint against us in this way:--They allege that while we confess [1279] three Persons we say that there is one goodness, and one power, and one Godhead. And in this assertion they do not go beyond the truth; for we do say so. But the ground of their complaint is that their custom does not admit this, and Scripture does not support it. What then is our reply? We do not think that it is right to make their prevailing custom the law and rule of sound doctrine. For if custom is to avail for [1280] proof of soundness, we too, surely, may advance our prevailing custom; and if they reject this, we are surely not bound to follow theirs. Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words.