Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
iii:'S>ii;i>:
05 =
COi
ens
Ms
iis:
itmamtlaimtM^^m
>
I
i
I
r \^'
/ ^
•v>
LIBKARY OF FATHERS
OF THE
MM
YET SHALL NOT THY TEACHERS BE REMOVED INTO A CORNER ANY MORE, BUT
THINE EYES SHALL SEE THY TEACHERS. Isaiah XXX. 20.
OXFORD-
JAMES PARKER & CO.
AND RIVINGTONS,
LONDON, OXFORD, AND CAMBRIDGE.
\
j
r-
TO THE
WILLIAM
LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY,
PRIMATE OP ALL ENGLAND,
THIS LIBRARY
OF
RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED,
IN TOKEN OF
S. ATHAN A S I U S,
ARCHBISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA,
1
\v
Y 1
SELECT TREATISES
OP
S. ATHANASIUS,
ARCHBISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA,
TRANSLATED,
OXFORD :
560 col. 1/or Mic. vii. 18 ... 377 read Mic. vii. 18 ... 149, 377.
561 col. 1 in S. John i. 1, 2 dele 28 and
in S. John i. 1 — 3 add ref. 28.
for i. 9 . .
149, 535 read i. 9 . . .
149, 242, 535. .
John
col. 2 in S. ^ in S. John x. 30 add ref 144
x. 29 dele 144
add S. John xiv. 9 192.
562 col. 1 add S. John xiv. 28, 29 199 . .
dele S. John xv. 16 149 & to S. John xvi. 15 add ref. 149.
.
SELECT TREATISES
OF
S. ATHANASIUS,
ARCHBISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA,
OF
S. ATHANA S I U S,
ARCHBISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA,
TRANSLATED,
l^UiT II.
EPISTLE OF S. ATHANASIUS
IN DEFENCE OF THE NICENE DEFINITION.
CHAPTER I.
INTEODUCTION.
PAGE
reason
;
-•.....
The complaint of the Avians against the Nicene Council their fickle-
ness they are like Jews their employment of force instead of
;
;
CHAPTER II.
CHAPTER III.
" "
THE MEANING OF THE WOED SON AS APPLIED TO OUE LOED.
our Lord alone partakes the Father. The second and true sense ;
....
; ;
CHAPTER IV.
there is but one Son, Word, &c. All the titles of the Son
24
CHAPTER V.
30
CHAPTER VI.
Theognostus
Origen
;
........
Dionysius of Alexandria ; Dionysius of Rome ;
43
CHAPTER VII.
"
ON THE AEIAN SYMBOL INGENEEATE."
This term afterwards adopted by the Arians and why three senses ; ;
Conclusion . . . . . . . .51
APPENDIX.
EPISTLE OF S. ATHANASIUS
CONCERNING THE COUNCILS HELD AT AKIMINUM IN
ITALY AND AT SELBUCIA IN ISAURIA.
CHAPTER I.
Council to Constantius ;
its decree. Proceedings at Seleucia ;
re-
liections on the conduct of the Arians . . . .73
CHAPTER II.
at Sirmium 160
Concerning the Confessions
. . .
FOUR DISCOURSES
OF S. ATHANASIUS AGAINST THE ARIANS.
DISCOURSE I.
CHAPTER I.
INTEODtrCTION .
PAGE
Reason
.......
persons indifferent about Arianism
for writing ;
certain ;
Arians are not Christians, because sectaries always take the name
of their founder 177
CHAPTER II.
Arius maintains that God became a Father, and the Son was not
always the Son out of nothing once He was not He was not before
; ; ;
CHAPTER III.
CHAPTER IV.
CHAPTER V.
SUBJECT CONTINUED.
PAGE
The objection, that the Son's eternity makes Him co-ordinate with
the Father, introduces the subject of His Divine Sonship, as a second
proof of His eternity. The word Son is used in a transcendent, but
is to be understood in a real sense. Since all things partake of the
Father in partaking of the Son, He is the whole participation of the
Father, that is, He is the Son by nature ; for to be wholly par-
ticipated is to beget . . . . . . 200
CHAPTER VI.
SUBJECT CONTINUED.
Third proof of the Son's eternity, viz. from other titles indicative of
His consubstantiality as the Creator; as One of the Blessed
;
Only Son. Men are not really fathers and really sons, but shadows
of the True. The Son does not become a Father, because He has
received from the Father, to be immutable and ever the same 205 .
CHAPTER VII.
CHAPTER VIII.
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED.
.......
this misconception.
CHAPTER IX.
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED.
PAGE
Whether is the Ingenerate one or two ? Inconsistent in Arians to
use an unscriptural word necessary to define its meaning.
;
Dif-
ferent senses of the word. If it means " without Father," there is
but One Ingenerate if "without beginning or creation," there are
;
CHAPTER X.
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED.
How the Word has free-will, yet without being alterable. He is un-
alterable because the Image of the Father proved from texts
;
230 .
CHAPTER XI.
TEXTS EXPLAINED ;
AND FIEST, PHIL. ii. 9, 10.
Phil. ii. 9, 10. Whether the words " Wherefore God hath highly
"
exalted prove moral probation and advancement. Ai'gued against,
"
first, from the force of the word Son," according to the Segiila
Fidel ; which is inconsistent s\'ith such an interpretation. Next,
"
the passage examined. Ecclesiastical sense of highly exalted,"
" "
and gave," and wherefore ;" viz. as being spoken with reference
to oui" Lord's manhood. Secondary sense ; viz. as implying the
"
Word's " exaltation through the Rcsun-ection in the same sense
in which Scripture speaks of His descent in the Incarnation ;
how the phrase does not derogate from the Nature of the Word . 233
CHAPTER XII.
" "
Whether the words therefore," anointed," &c., imply that the
Word has been rewarded. Argued against, first, from the word
"fellows" i.e. "partakers." He is anointed with the Spirit in His
manhood to sanctify human nature. Therefore the Spiiit de-
scended on Him in Jordan, when in the flesh. And for us He is
CHAPTER XIII.
On
........
the meaning of the formula
Anathema
TrpliryfvpTjdrjvai ovk ^p, in the Nicene
272
DISCOURSE II.
CHAPTER XIV.
"
"works" which " God will bring into judgment.''") nor by faith-
ful ;" and is confuted by the immediate context, which is about
Priesthood and by the foregoing passage, which explains the word
;
CHAPTER XV.
us ;
and is relative to the Jews. Parallel instance in Gen. xxvii. 29,
CHAPTER XVI.
The Word then differs from all creatures in that in which they,
though otherwise diifering, all agree together, as creatures viz. ;
....
;
CHAPTER XVII.
CHAPTER XVIII.
CHAPTER XIX.
CHAPTER XX.
TEXTS EXPLAINED ; SIXTHLY, PEOVEEBS viii. 22. CONTINUED.
" for the with a par-
Our Lord is said to be created works," i. e.
353
CHAPTER XXI.
TEXTS EXPLAINED; SIXTHLY, PEOVEEBS viii. 22. CONTINUED.
"
Our Lord not said in Scripture to be created," nor the works to be
" " In the "
begotten." beginning means, in the case of the works,
"from the beginning." Scripture passages explained. are We
made by God first, begotten next creatures by nature, sons by ;
necessary at all. Texts which contrast the Word and the works . 362
CHAPTER XXII.
TEXTS EXPLAINED ; SIXTHLY, THE CONTEXT OF PEOVEEBS viii. 22.
viz. 22—30.
" "
the Rec/ula Fidei. Founded
It is right to interpret this passage by
is used in contrast to superstructure and it implies, as in the ;
works.
22.
DISCOURSE III.
CHAPTER XXIII.
PAGE
Introduction. The The Father and the
doctrine of the Coinherence.
Son Each whole and perfect God. They are in Each Other,
because their Substance is One and the Same. They are Each
Perfect and have One Substance, because the Second Person is the
Son of the First. Asterius's evasive explanation of the text under
review refuted. Since the Son has all that the Father has, He
;
is His Image ;
CHAPTER XXIV.
TEXTS EXPLAINED ; EIGHTHLT, JOHN xvii. 3. AND THE LIKE.
CHAPTER XXV.
TEXTS EXPLAINED ; NINTHLY, JOHN X. 30. Xvii. 11, &C.
Arian explanation, that the Son is one with the Father in will and
judgment; but so are all good men, nay things inanimate; contrast
of the Son. Oneness between Them is in natm'e, because there is
oneness in operation. Angels not objects of praj'er, because they do
not work together with God, but the Son texts quoted. Seeing an
;
Angel, is not seeing God. Arians in fact hold two Gods, and tend
to Gentile polytheism. Arian explanation that " The Father and
Son are one, as we are one with Christ," is put aside by the Regula
Fidei, and shewn invalid by the usage of Scripture in illustrations ;
the true force of the comparison force of the terms used. Force
;
CHAPTER XXVI.
INTEODtJCTOET TO TEXTS FEOM THE GOSPELS ON THE INCAENATION.
PAGE
Enumeration of texts still to be explained. Arians compared to the
Jews. We must recur to the Regula Fidei. Our Lord did not
come into, but became, man, and therefore had the acts and affec-
tions of the flesh. The same works divine and human. Thus the
flesh was purified, and men were made immortal. Reference to
1 Pet. iv. 1. . . . 43G . . . .
CHAPTER XXVII.
TEXTS EXPLAINED ; TENTHLT, MATTHEW xxviii. 18. JOHN iii. 35. &C.
chapter.) Again, they ai-e used with reference to our Lord's human
nature ;
for our sake, that we might receive and not lose, as
and
receiving in Him. And consistently with other parts of Scripture,
which shew that He had the power, &c., before He received it.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
TEXTS EXPLAINED; ELEVENTHLY, MASK xiii. 32. AND LUKE ii. 52.
Holy Spirit knows the Day, therefore the Son knows; if the Son
knows the Father, therefore He knows the Day if He has all that ;
argued from Matt. xxiv. 42. As He asked about Lazarus's grave, &c.
yet knew, so He knows as S. Paul said, "whether in the body I know
;
not," (tc. yet knew, so He knows. He said He knew not, for our
profit, that we be
not curious, (as in Acts i. 7. where on the contrary
He did not say He knew not;) that we be not secure and slotliful.
As the Almighty asks of Adam and of Cain, 3'ct knew, so the Son
knows. Again, He also advanced in Wisdom as man else He made ;
CHAPTER XXIX.
TEXTS EXPLAINED ; TWELFTHLY, MATTHEW XXvi. 39 ;
CHAPTER XXX.
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED, AS IN CHAPTEES vii. — X.
Whether the Son is begotten at the Father's will ? This \drtuaUy the
same as whether Once He was not ? and used by the Ai-ians to
introduce the latter question. The JRegula Fidei answers it at once
in the negative by contrary texts. The Arians follow the Valen-
tinians in maintaining a precedent wiU which reaUy is only
;
DISCOURSE IV.
Subject I.
The doctrine of the 3£onarchia implies or requires, tiot negatives,
the substantial existence of the Word and Son.
§§• 1-5-
The substantiality of the Word proved from Scripture. If the One
Origin be substantial, Its Word is substantial. Unless the Word
and Son be a second Origin, or a woi'k, or an attribute (and so God
be compounded), or at the same time Father, or involve a second
nature in God, He is from God's Substance and distinct from Him.
Illustration of John x. 30. di-awn from Deut. iv. 4. . . 512
CONTENTS. Xlll
Subject II.
§§ 6, 7.
PAGE
When Word and Sonhungered, wept, and was wearied, He acted
......
the
as our Mediator, taking on Him what was ours, that He might
Subject III.
Arians date the Son's beginning earlier than the Photinians . . 521
Subject IV.
§§. 9, 10.
Unless Father and Son are two in name only, or as parts and so
Subject V.
Photinians, like Arians, say that the Word was, not indeed created,
but developed, to create us as if the Divine silence were a state of
;
Subject VI.
Subject VII.
§§. 15—24
PAGE
Since the Word is from God, He must be Son. Since the Son is
Subject VIIL
{Being Subject 4. continued.)
§. 25.
Subject IX.
That the Son the Co-existing Word, argued from the New Testa-
is
S. ATHANA S I U S,
ARCHBISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA,
CHAP. I.
INTRODUCTION.
Tlie complaint of the Arians against the Nicene Council ; their fickleness ;
at the effrontery which led the Arians, after all the past de-
tection of unsoundness and futility in their arguments, nay,
after the general conviction of their extreme perverseness,
"
still to complain like the Jews, Why did the Fathers at
Nicaea use terms not in Scripture
'
Of the substance ' and '',
*
euce/Seia, affe&fia, &c. here trans- out devotion, the Son evcTe^Tis devout,
lated " religion, h-religion, religious, as paying devotion to the Father."
&c. &c." are technical words through- Socr. Hist. ii. 43. Hence Arius ends
out, being taken from S. Paul's text, his Letter to Eusebius with oA.tj0cos
" Great is the Tlieod. Hist.
mystery of g'odliness," eva-efiif. i. 4.
fhm^das, i. e. orthodoxy. Such too *>
appears that the Arians did not
It
seems to be the meaning of " godly ad- venture to speak disrespectfully of the
"
monitions," and godly judgments," definition of the Council till the date
and "this godly and well-learned (A.D.350.)ofthis work; whenAcacius
man," in our Ordination Services. The headed them. Yet the plea here used,
Latin translation is "pius," " pietas." the unscriptural character of its sjtu-
It might be in some respects suitably bol, had been suggested to Constan-
"
rendered devout
by" and
deriva-
its tins on his accession, A.I). 337, by
tives. On its familiar use in the con- the Arian priest, the favourite of Con-
troversy depends the blasphemous jest stantia, to whom Constantine had
of Eudoxius, Arian Bishop of Constan- entrusted his will, Theod. Hist. ii. 3 ;
tinople, which was received with loud and Eusebius of Ciesarea glances at it,
laughter in tlie Cathedral, and remain- at the time of the Council, in the letter
ed in esteem down to Socrates's day, to his Church, which is subjoined to
" The Father is
dere/B^s, as being with- this Treatise.
B
The Avians, lUce the Jews, unwilling to believe,
NiCEN. '
One in substance V" Thou then, as a man of learning,
Def.
in spite of their subterfuges, didst convict them of talking
bfioov-
aiov to no purpose ; and they in devising them were but acting
suitably to their own For they are as
evil disposition.
variable and fickle in their sentiments, as chameleons in
their colours ^ and when exposed they look confused ; and
;
" "
said, Why hast Thou, being God, become man ? for His
works proved Him God, that they might both worship the
^
"=
Alexander also calls them chame- iTnx^ipf)lxa. and so Orat. i. § 44.
leons, Socr. i. 6. p. 12. Athanasius init. but infra, § 25. eTnxeiprjfj.aTa
so calls the Meletians, Hist. Arian. means more definitely reasonings or
" the
§ 79. Cyril compares them to argumentations.
^
leopard which cannot change his aXoyias an allusion, frequent in
;
spots." Dial. ii. init. t. v. i. Aub., Naz. Athanasius, to the judicial consequence
Or. 28. 2. On the fickleness of the of their denying T:he Word of God.
"
Arians, vid. infra, § 4. &c. Orat. ii. 40. Thus, just below, n. 3. Denying the
He says, ad Ep. iEg. 6. that they con- Word" or Reason "of God, reason
sidered Creeds as yearly covenants ; have thev none." Also Orat. i. § 35.
and de Synod. § 3. 4. as State Edicts, fin. § 40.' init, § 62. Orat. ii. § 7. init.
vid. also § 14. and passim. "What Hence he so often calls the Arians
" mad " and " " e. " not
wonder that they fight against their deranged g. ;
fathers, when they fight against them- aware how mad thek reason is." Orat,
selves ?" § 37. [infra p. 135] i. §37.
and fertile in exceptions.
goodness of tlie Father, and admire the Son's economy for Chap.
I,
our sakes. However, this they did not say ; no, nor liked to
witness what He was doing ; or they witnessed indeed, for
this they could not help, but they changed their ground of
''
complaint again, Why
healest Thou the paralytic, why
makest Thou the born-blind to see, on the sabbath day ? "
But this too was an excuse, and mere murmuring for on ;
other days as well did the Lord heal all manner of sickness, Matt. 4,
335. he asks, Apol. contr. Arian. § 8. Orat. ii. § 4. where Parker maintains
[lb. p. 25] "How venture they to without reason that it should be trans-
call that a Council in which a Count
" external condition." vid. also
lated,
presided, and an executioner was pre- Theod. Hist. i. 4. init.
sent, and a registrar [or jailer] intro-
CHAP. II.
of the Arians.
NicEN. it is just tliat those wlio are under a cliarge should confine
— ^-^— themselves to their own
defence,) or if they have an unclean
consciencOjand are aware of their own irreligiouj let them not
complain of what they do not understand,, or they will bring
on them a double imputation, of irreligion and of ignorance.
Rather let them investigate the matter in a docile spirit, and
Orat.iii. learning what hitherto they have not known, cleanse their
§ 28.
Socr. p. P r & of truth and the doctrines of
irreligious ears with the spring
-, .
11. c. religion ^
§ 3. 2. Now it happened to the Eusebians in the Nicene Council
as follows :
—while they stood out in their irreligion, and at-
tempted their fight against God ", the terms they used were
replete with irreligion; but the assembled Bishops who were
more than three hundred, mildly and charitably required of
them to explain and defend themselves on religious grounds.
Scarcely, however, did they begin to speak, when they were
convicted", and one differed from another; then perceiving the
straits in which their heresy lay, they remained dumb, and by
their silence confessed the disgrace which came upon their
heterodoxy. Onthis the Bishops, having negatived the terms
they had invented, published against them the sound and ec-
clesiastical faith ; and, whereas all subscribed it, the Euse-
bians subscribed italso in those very words, of which they are
^^
now complaining, I mean, "'of the substance and "one in
substance,^^ and that ^Hhe Son of God is neither creature or
work, nor in the number of things generated ^, but that the
2
yepTjTwy
his Church a letter, saying that this was the Churches faith,
andthe tradition of the Fathers and made a public profession ;
39. xxiii. 9. are of very frequent use in 236. init. vid. also Cj-ril (Thesaiuiis
Athan. as xp'^^TOiuaxoi, in speaking
is
p. 19 e. p. 24 e.). Qeofj-axoi is used of
of tlie Arians, vid. infra passim, also otlier lieretics, e. g. the Manicliees, by
afTLfMax^M-fvoL rw ffccTrjpL Ep. Encycl. Greg. Naz. Orat. 45. § 8.
° i. e. " convicted
§ 5. [Hist, tracts p. 8 O.T.] And in themselves," infr.
the beginning of the controversy, § 18. init. kavrS>v atX KUTTiyopot, ad
Alexander ap. Socr. i. 6. p. 10. b. c. Ep. /Eg. § 6. i. e. by their variations,
p. 12. p. 13. Theod. Hist. i. 3. p. 729, vid. Tit. iii. 11. avr'oKaTaKpnos.
And so Oeona-xos yXaxrca, Basil, contr.
An ecumenical Council cannot he reversed. 7
P The
party he is writing ag^ainst is succeeded in the see of Caesarea. He
the Acacian, of whom he does not seem attempted to defend Arianism neither
to have had much distinct knowledge, under the cloak of Seniiarianism, nor
He contrasts them again and again in with the bold logic of the Anoma>ans,
the passages which follow witli the but by a pretended adherence to Scrip-
Eusebians of the Nicene Council, and ture.' His formula was the Sixowv
(like), as the
Semiarian was the
says that he is sure that the ground
in substance), and the
they take when examined will be found ^yuoiouirioj/ (like
substantially the same as the Eusebian. Anomtean, as the word signifies, the
vid. § 6. ini't. et alib. § 7. init. § !»• cir. a.p6notoi', or unlike.
Jin. § 10. cir. fin. § 13. init. rSre /col i I'astor.ii. 9. who is speak-
Hennas,
vw. § 18. circ.fin. § 2^. fin. Acacius ing immediately, as S.James, of wa-
was a pupil of Eusebius's, whom he vering in prayer.
8 Mutual agreement the note of doctors of the Church.
NicEN. the note of dealers rather than of doctors. For^ what our
— ^^1— Fathers have delivered, this is truly doctrine ; and this is
j^
*
This is Atlian.'s deliberate judg- reason of his so accounting tliem,
ment.vid. de Sent. Dion, fin, where lie was their atrocious cruelty towards
says, "Who then will continue to call Catholics; this leads him elsewhere to
these men Christians, whose leader is break out. " O
new heresy, that has
the devil, and not rather diabolical?" put on the whole devil in irreligious
and he adds, " not only Christ's foes, doctrine a?i(l conduct .'" Hist. Arian.
XpnTTOjjLdxoi, hut diabolical also." In § 6(>. [Hist, tracts p. 277 O.T.] also
" hatred of
§ 24. he speaks of Arius's Alexander, "diabolicil," ap. Theod.
" "
the truth." Again, though thedia- Hist. i. 3.p. 731. satanical,"
il)i(l.
p.
bolical men rave." Orat. iii. § 8. [infra 741 vid. also Socr.i. 9. p. 30 fin. Hilar,
.
though His creation and generation not man's His generation inde-
like ;
NicEN. 1, They say tlien what the others held and dared to main-
c tain before them " Not always Father, always Son
; for the
Q ;
true Word, nor His only and true Wisdom ; but being a
creature and one of the works. He is by a strong figure ^
called Word and Wisdom ; for by the Word which is in
God was He made, as were all things. Wherefore the Son
is not true God ^"
2. Now it
may serve to make them understand what they
are saying, to ask them first this, what in fact a son is, and of
what is that name significant ". In truth, Divine Scripture
'
KaTaxpvo"riKais. This word is no- a beginning of existence, they did not
ticcd and protested against by Alex- dare to say that He was Son merely
ander, Socr. Hist. i. 6. p. 11 a. by the in the sense in which we are sons,
Semiariansat Ancyra, Epiph.Hser. 73. though, as Athan. contends, they ne-
n. 5. by Basil, contr. Eunom. ii. 23. cessarily tended to this conclusion,
and by Cyril, Dial. ii. t. v. i. pp. 432, 3. directly they receded from the Catholic
•
vid. ad Ep. Mg. 12. Orat. i. § 5. view. Thus Arius sard that He was
6. de Synod. 15, 16. Athanas. seems a creature, "but not as one of the
to have had in mind Socr. i. 6. p. 10, creatures," Orat.
ii. § 19.
[infra p. 307]
11. or the like. Valens at Ariminum said the same.
"
vid. Orat. i. § 38. The controver- Jerora. adv. Lucifer. 18. Hilary says,
sy turned on the question what was that not daring directly to deny that
meant bytheword" Son." Though the he was God, the Arians merely asked
Arianswould not allow with the Catho- "whether He was a Son." de Trin.
lies that our liord was Son by nature, viii. 3. Athanasius remarks upon this
and maintained that the word implied reluctance to speak out, challenging
Our Lord's Sonskljj is not the reward of virtue. 11
acquaints us with & double sense of this word one whicli Chap. :
—
Moses sets before us in the Law, When thou shalt hearken Deut. 13,
to the voice of the Lord thy God, to Iceep all His command- 18;14, l.
ments which I command thee this, day, to do that ivhich is
eyes of the Lord thy God, ye shall
in the he children
right
of the Lord your God; as also in the Gospel, John says,
But as many as Him, to them gave He power to
received John 1,
glory of the name, from His very first beginning, still there
will be no difference between Him and those who receive
the name upon their actions, so long as this is the ground
on which He as others has the character of son. For Adam
too, though he received grace from the first, and upon his
creation was at once placed in paradise, differed in no respect
either from Enoch, who was translated thither after his
birth on his pleasing God, or from the Apostle, who likewise
was caught up to Paradise after his actions ; nay, not from
the thief, who on the ground of his confession, received a
promise that he should be forthwith in paradise.
" the
them to present heresy naked," the Son's, ibid. i.
Epiphaniiis Haer.
1.
says. All these things hath My Hand made ; And Paul taught Chai
us as he had learned''', that There is one God, from whom all '•
Thus He, always as now, speaks to the sun and it rises, ^"•
and commands the clouds and it rains upon one place and ;
own friends, and from that time they use this form of words, ^^ synod!
broken reed as it is, being ignoi^ant, the bewildered men, how § ^^•
brittle it is. For if it was impossible for things generated
to bear the hand of God, and you hold the Son to be one of
their number, how was He too equal to this formation by
God alone ? and if a Mediator became necessary that things
generated might come to be, and you hold the Son to be
generate, then must there have been some medium before
Him, for His creation; and that Mediator himself again being
a creature, it follows that he too needed another Mediator for
his own constitution. And though we were to devise another,
we must first devise his Mediator, so that we shall never come
to an end. And thus a Mediator being ever in request, never
will the creation be constituted, because nothing generate, as
you say, can bear the absolute hand of the Ingenerate"'. And
if, on your perceiving the extravagance of this, you begin to
say that the Son, though a creature, was made capable of
''
nad&iv eSi'Sao-Kej', implying the tra- Orat. i. § 31. ii. § 24. 28. 37. 40. iii.
ditional nature of the teaching. And § 2. 60. de Synod. § 18. 19. He was
so S. Paul himself, 1 Cor. xv, 3. vid. by profession a Sophist, and a pupil of
for an illustration, supr. § 5. init. also Luciau's. He lapsed in tiie persecution
note of Maxiinian, and sacrificed, as inti-
y.
^
Asterius is one of the most famous mated in the text,
"
of the elder Arians, and liis work in vid. infr. § 24. Orat. i. § 1,"». fin.
defence of the heresy is frequently ii. § 2'J.
Epiph. H:er. 7(1. p. Ml.
quoted by Athanasius. vid. infr. 20.
14 Ifthe
8ononlyfirstmade,HeisnotofdifferentnaturefTomothers.
that Adam had any prerogative over other men, or was dif-
ferent from those who came after him, granting that he alone
was made and fashioned by God alone, and we all spring
from Adam, and consist according to succession of the race,
so long as he was fashioned from the earth as others, and at
9. first not being, afterwards came to be. But though we were
§
to allow some prerogative to the Protoplast as
having been
vouchsafed the hand of God, still it must be one of honour
not of nature. For he came of the earth, as other men ; and
the hand which then fashioned Adam, now also and ever is
fashioning and giving entire consistence to those who come
after him. And God Himself declares this to Jeremias, as
Jer. 15.-'- ^^^^ before ; Before I formed thee in the womh, I hieiv
Is. 66, 2. thee ; and so He
says of all. All those things hath My hand
lb. 44, made ; and again by Esaias, Thus saith the Lord, thy
^^-
redeemer, and He that formed thee from the womh, I am
the Lord that maheth all things ; that streteheth forth the
heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by Myself
Ps. 119, And David, knowing this, says in the Psalm, Thy hands
have made me and fashioned me ; and He who says in Esaias,
Is. 49, 5. Thus saith the Lord who formed Me from the womb to be
His servant, signifies the same. Therefore, in. respect of
nature, he differs nothing from us though he precede us in
time, so long as we all consist and are created by the same
hand. If then these be your thoughts, O Arians, about
the Son of God too, that thus He subsists and came to be,
then in your judgment He will difi'er nothing on the score of
nature from others, so long as He too was not, and came to be.
•
and the name was by grace united to Him in His creation Chap.
for His virtue's sake. For He Himself is one of tliose, from iii: — —
what you say, of whom the Spirit says in the Psalms, He Ps. 33, 9.
spalie the word, and they ivere made; He commanded, and
they were created. If so, who was it to whom God gave
command for the Son's creation? for a Word there must be
'^
partake the Father % who says, I have begotten and exalted Is. l, 2.
children. For if we did not partake Him, He had not
said, / have begotten ; but if He Himself begat us, no other
than He is our Father^. And, as before, it matters not,
whether the Son has something more and was made first, but
^
In like manner, " Men were made pleteness. vid. de Synod. § 51. contr.
through the Word, when the Fatlier Gent. 46. fin. Hence S.Austin says,
Wimni'M willed:' Orat. i. 63. [infa-a p. " As the Father has life in
Hiniself,"so
269] The Word forms matter as in- hath He given also to the Son to have
'
joined by, and ministering to, God." life in Himself, not by partieipafinsr,
irpocnaTToixevos koX invovpyaiv. ibid. ii. but in Himself. For we have not life
§ 22. [infra p. 311.] contr. Gent. 46. in ourselves, but in our God. But that
vid. p. 311, note i. Father, who has life in Himself, begat
^
His argument is, that if the Son a Son such, as to have life in Himself,
but partooli the Father in the sense in not to become partaker of life, but to
which we partake the Son, then the be life ; and of that life to
Himself
Son would not impart to us the Father, make
us partakers." Serm 1 27. <le
.
but Himself, and would be a separat- Verb. Evang. 9. [on the N,T. j)p. 558,
ing as well as unitingmedium between 559 O.T.]
" To
the Father and us whereas He brings say God is wholli/ par-
'
;
us so near to the Father, that we are taken, is the same as saying that God
the Father's children, not His, and bei^ets." Orat. i. § 16. [infra p. 203]
therefore He must be Himself one with And in like manner, our inferior par-
the Father, or the Father must be in ticipation involves such sonship as is
Him with an incomprehensible com- vouchsafed to us.
16 No sense ofSonship can he mainlained hut the Catholic.
is placed over ten cities, another over five ; and some sit on
19 — 22.
TTOTraOris
K And so in Orat. ii. § was that our Lord became the Son by
"
Though the Son surpassed other irpoKoirri, or growth in holiness, (vid.
things on a comparison, yet He were Luke ii, 53. irpoe/coTTTe,)" advancing as
equally a creature with them ; for even a man," Orat. iii. § 51 [infra p. 4/2] .
'^*-
and God has being^, and men are said to be, having received 3 ^^eVrx.
from God this gift also. Yet does God create as men do ?
or is His being as man's being? Perish the thought; we
understand the terms in one sense of God, and in another of
men. For God creates, in that He calls what is not into
being, needing nothing thereunto but men work some
;
who gives to another the origin of be- means religiously,and wishes to con-
ing according to a nature like his vey by a religious sense." vid. also
it
Son of God." Theod. Hist. i. 3. p. 732. spoke fi-oni Scripture, but was silenced
vid. Eusebius, in his Letter sub- by the Saviour ; Paul spoke from pro-
'
»
Vid. also Inearn. This
§ 17. make men His pattern, but rather we
contrast is not commonly found in men, for that God is properly unA alone
ecclesiastical writers, who are used to truly Father of His Son, are also call-
say that Ood is present every where, ed fathers of our own children, for ' of
in substance as well as by energy or Him is every father-liood in heaven and
power. S. Clement ho wever, expresses
, on eartii nanied.' " § 23. [p. 214] The
himself still more strongly in the same Semiarians at Ancyra quote the same
" In substance far
way, off, (for how text for the same doctrine. Epiphan.
can the generate come close to the Hter. 73. 5. As do Cyril in Joan. i. p.
Ingenerate?) but most close in power, 24. [p. 27 O.T.], Thesaur. 32. p. 281.
in which the universe is embosomed." and Damascene de Fid. Orth. i. 8.
Strom. 2. circ. init. but the parenthe- The same parallel, as existing be ween
sis explains his meaning, vid. Cyril. creation and generation, is insisted
Thesaur. 6. p. 44. The common doc- on by Isidor. Pel. Ep. iii. 355. Basil
trine of the Fathers is,that God is contr. Eun. iv. p. 280 A., Cyril The-
present every where in substance, vid. saur. 6. p. 43. Epiph. Hter. 69. 36. and
Petav. de Ueo, iii. 8. and 9. It may Gregor. Naz. Orat. 20. 9. who observes
be remarked, that S.Clementcontinues that God creates with a word, Ps. 148,
" neither which evidently transcends human
inclosing nor inclosed." 5.
°
In Almighty God is the perfection creations. Theodorus Abucara, with
and first pattern of what is seen in sha- the same object, draws out the parallel
dow in human nature, according to the of life, {^w?;, as Athan. that of
imperfection of the subject matter and ; elvaL. Opusc. iii. p. 420 422.— being,
supply (iod with materials, and so to this should take place, and it should be
deny him to be Creator but if the bare
; resolved into its original nothing, God
idea of God transcends such thoughts, governs and sustains it all by His own
and a man believes that He is in being, Word, who is Himself God, "and who,
not as we are, and yet in being, as as he proceeds, § 42. "remaining Him-
God, and that He creates not as man selfimmoveablewith the Fatlier,moves
creates, but yet creates as God, there- things in His own consistence, as
all
fore He begets also, not as men beget, each may seem fit to His Father."
but begets as God. For God does not Joan. i. p. 24 [p. 27 O.T.]
Divine generation is not material, hut spiritual. 19
but God, being without parts, is Father of the Sou without Chap.
^i of the
partition or passion; for there is neither effluence ^-
tvell pleased. And He too is the Father's Word, from which '"
being; but God, in that He ever is, is ever Father of the Son ^
1 S. Cyril, Dial. iv. init. p. 505 E. one, substantial andsubsistiiifr."
tloiii is
speaks of the. Qpv\\ov)j.iV7) airoppoy], Athaii. Orat. iv. 1. fin. [infra p. 514]
and disclaims it, Thesaur. " "
6. p. 43. '^
c 2
20 As is sy^nholized by the words Light, Fountain, Life, Sj-c.
Matt. 11, things that are parallel ; but, since no one knoweth the Son hut
27. the Father, and no one hnoweth the Father hut the Son, and
he to whomsoever the Son ivill reveal Him, therefore the sacred
whom the Son has revealed Him, have given us a
writers to
Heb. 1,3. certain image from things visible, saying, Who is the hright-
ness of His glory, and the Expression
of His Person ; and again,
Ps. 36, Por ivith Thee is the ivell of life, and in Thy light shall ive
see light ; and when the Word chides Israel, He
Bar. 3, says. Thou
12- hast forsalcen the Fountain
of ivisdom ; and this Fountain it
says. They have forsaken Me the Fountain of living
Jer. 2, is which
1
YiA. Ep.
^'^*^^'"^' *• And mean indeed and very dim is the illustration ^
ad
1 .
compared with what we desiderate but yet it is possible ;
it to understand
20. p. fi'om
something above man's nature, instead
669. a. b. of
thinking the Son's generation to be on a level with ours.
For who can even imagine that the radiance of light ever
was not, so that he should dare to say that the Son was not
always, or that the Son was not before His generation ? or
who is capable of separating the radiance from the sun, or to
conceive of the fountain as ever void of life, that he should
John 14, " The Son is from
madly say, nothing," who says, I am
the life, or "alien to the Father's substance," who says,
lb. 9. He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father ? for the sacred
writers wishing us thus to understand, have given these
illustrations ; and it is indecent and most irreligious, when
Scripture contains such images, to form ideas concerning
our Lord from others which are neither in Scripture, nor
have any religious bearing.
§ 1^. 11. Therefore let them tell us, from what teacher or by what
tradition they derived these notions
concerning the Saviour?
Prov. 8, "We have read," they will say, "in the Proverbs, The Lord
2
v'id.
^^^^^^ created Me a heginning of His ways unto His works'^;
Orat. ii. this the Eusebians used to insist on", and vou write me word,
•'
through-
out.
"Word, Wisdom, Light," &c. serve whose AVord He is, nor an offspring
to guard the title "Son" from
any passiblybegotten."Orat. i. § 28. [infra
notions of parts or dimensions, pp. 220, 221]
e.g.
"He is not composed of parts, but "
Eusebius of Nicomedia quotesit in
being impassible and single, He is im- his Letter to Paidinus, ap. Theodor.
passibly and indivisibly Father of the Hist. i. 5. And Eusebius of Csesarea
Son . for
. .the Word and Wisdom
. . .
Denionstr. Evang. v. 1 .
Creation is an external act, generation an internal. 21
every quarter this passage, and saying that the Son was one
of the creatures, and reckoning Him with things generated ^ yev-n- >
the maker, but the son unlike him who bespat him but ;
things generated and created John speaks. All things were ^^*
made by Kim ; but preaching of the Lord, he says, Tlie 3.
Only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He
hath declared Him. If then son, therefore not creature;
if creature, not son; for great is the difference between
many arpfuments have been aheady rau.se we liave already shewn that He
brought, and may be added, against is not external to His Father."
22 The Son loas created ivhen^He came in our flesh.
NicEN. 12.
" Has tlien tlie passage no meaning V for this, like a
§
^^'
- swarm of- gnats,
^ ^ _
tliey
^
— —— ^. No
^ about us
are droning „„^
surely,
^.j ,
it is . —
not without meaning, but lias a very apposite one ; for it is
true to say that tlie Son was created too, but this took place
when He became man : for creation beloug-s to man. And
any one may find this sense duly given in the divine oracles,
whoj instead of accounting their study a secondary matter, in-
vestigates the time and characters ^, and the object, and thus
studies and ponders what he reads. Now as to the season
spoken of, he will find for certain that, whereas the Lord
'
alcivuv
always is, at length in fulness of the ages^ He became
;
man
and whereas He is Son of God, He became Son of man also.
And as to the object he will understand, that, wishing to
annul our death. He took on Himself a body from the Virgin
Mary ;
that by offering this unto the Father a sacrifice for
Heb. 2, all. He might deliver us all, -who by fear of death were all
our life through subject to bondage. And as to the character,
it is indeed the Saviour^s, but is said of Him when He took
3^ § '26—
of ^i^ ^^ Lord and God and true Light, we understand
41- Him as being from the Father, so on hearing. The Lord
created, and Servant, and He .suffered, we shall justly ascribe
this, not to the Godhead, for it is irrelevant, but we must
it these things are proper, and this flesh was none other's
y
irepiPofjL^ovcnv. So in ad Afros. 5. the meaning of the word, contr.
Apoll.
init. And Sent. D. § 19. Trepiepxovrai ii.2. and 10 though it there approxi-
;
name of '^ men of God " and " men in Christ/' But as we,
by receiving the Spirit, do not lose our own proper sub-
stance, so the Lord, when made man for us, and bearing a
body, was no less God for He was not lessened by the
;
Power, Word or Reason, and Wisdom, the names of the Son, imply
eternity ; as well as the Father's title of Fountain. The Arians reply that
these do not formally belong to the essence of the Son, but are names
given Him ; that God has many words, powers, &c. Why there is but
one Son and Word, &c. All the titles of the Son coincide in Him.
the glory as of the Only -he gotten of the Father, full of grace
and truth ; so that, the Word being the Only-begotten Son,
in this Word and in Wisdom heaven and earth and all that is
therein wei'e made. And of this Wisdom that God is Foun-
1
vid. tainwe have learned from^ Baruch, by IsraeFs being charged
5^19
with having forsaken the Fountain of Wisdom. If then they
deny Scripture, they are at once aliens to their name, and
'>
The main argument of the Arians begot the Son, he that was begotten
was that our Lord was aSon,andf/iere- had a beginningof existence; and from
/orewasnot eternal, but of a substance this it is plain that once the Son was
which had a beginning. With this not; and it follows of necessity that He
Arius started in his dispute with Alex- had His subsistence out of nothing."
ander. " Arius, a man not without Socr. i. 5. Accordingly Athanasius
thinking that the Bishop
dialectic skill, says, "Having argued with them as
was introducing the doctrine of Sabel- to the meaning of their own selected
lius the Libyan, out of contention fell term 'Son,' let us go on toothers,
off into the opinion diametrically oppo- which on the very face make for us,
site, .... and he says, '7/" the Father such as Word, Wisdom, &c."
To deny God's Wisdom, is to
deny that God is wise. 25
may fitly be called of all men atheists ^, and Christ's enemies. Chap.
for they have brought upon themselves these names. But if _
vid.
they agree with us that the sayings of Scripture are divinely supr.p.3.
""**^ ^'
inspired, let them dare to say openly what they think in
secret that God was once wordless and wisdomless and let '^j
them in their madness ^ say, " There was once when He was vid. -
'' '
not/' and, before His generation, Christ was not /' and 2.
''
j_
again let them declare that the Fountain begat not Wisdom
from Itself, but acquired It from without, till they have the
" The' Son came of
daring to say, nothing;" whence it will
follow that there is no longer a Fountain, but a sort of
2. How full of irreligion this is, I consider none can doubt § 16.
who hasever solittle understanding. But since they whisper
something about Word and Wisdom, being only names of
the Son ^, we must ask then. If these are only names of the
'
&\oyos, &<ro(pos. vid. infra, § 26. let God be not Father, but
called,
Tiiis is a frequent argument in tlie con- Framer only and Creator, and not of
troversy, viz. tliat to deprive the Fatlier a generative nature. But if the divine
of His Son or substantial Word, (A($7os,) substance be not fruitful, (Kap7ro7Jfos,)
is as great a sacrilege as to deny His but barren, as they say, as a light
Reason, \6yus,{ro}r- wliidi the Son re- which enlightens not, and a dry foun-
ceives His name. TimsOrat.i.§ 14.fin. tain, are they not ashamed to main-
[infra p. 202] Athan. says, "imputing tain that He possesses the creative
to God's nature an absence of His
" vid. also
energy ? tttj^t; efSrrjros.
Word, {aAoyiav or irrationality,) they Pseudo-Dion. Uiv. Nom. c. 2. Tnjyri «'«:
are most irreligious." vid. § 19. fin. 7rr)7f)s,ofthe Son. Epiphan.Ancor. 19.
24. Elsewhere, he says,
" Is a man And Cyril, " If thou take from God
not mad himself, who even entertains His being Father, thou wilt deny the
the thought that God is word-less and generative power (Kapiroy6voi') of the
wisdom-less ? for such illustrations divine nature, so that It no longer is
and such images Scripture hath pro- perfect. This then is a token of its
posed, that, considering the inability of perfection, and the Son who went forth
human nature to comprehend concern- from Him
apart from time, is a pledge
ing God,we might even from these, ((T(ppdyis) to the Father that He is
however poorly and dimly, discern as perfect." Thesaur. p. 37.
'
far as is attainable." Urat. ii. 32. Arius said, as the Eunomians after
[infra pp. 325, 32fi] vid. also iii. 63. him, that the Son was not really, but
iv. 14. Scrap, ii. 2. only called. Word and Wisdom, which
••
These were among the original were simply attributes of (iod, and the
positions of the Arians the former is ; prototvpcs of the Son. vid. Socr. i. 6.
mentioned by Socrates, vid. note b. the p. ll,Theod. Hist. 1,3. p. 731. Athan.
latter is one of those specified in the asks. Is the Son then more than wis-
Nicene Anathema. dom ? if on the other hand He be less,
<=
And so ii. 2. still He must be so called because of
7rr)77j ^rjpa. Scrap,
Orat. i. § 14 fin. also ii. § 2. [infra some gift or quality in Him, analogous
pp. 283, 284] where Athanasius speaks
towisdom, or of the nature of wisdom,
as if those who deny that Almighty and admitting of improvement and
God is Father, cannot really believe gntwth. Hut tliis was the notorious
in Him as a Creator. "If He be not doctrine! of Christ's -rrpoKo-n-y] or ad-
a Son, let Him be called a work, and vancement. " I am in wonder," he says,
26 The Arian ohjedlon that God had many ivovds.
ovaQai.
thing -external, is the extreme of madu'ess.
3. However, when they are beaten hence, and like the Euse-
bians are in these great straits, then they have this remaining
plea, which Arius too in ballads, and in his own Thalia^,
-
vid.
Svn. "
§'l5.
fabled, as a Many words speaketh God
new difficulty :
;
Orat. ii. § 37. [infi-a pp. 331, 332J and from Him, and is not made, ?/p^ not
" as the word of man, else one must con-
how, whereas God one, these
is
men introduce after their private no- sider God as man. Men have many
tions,many images, and wisdoms, and words, and after those many, not any
words, and say that theFather's proper one of them all for the speaker has
;
and natural Word is other than the ceased, and thereupon his word fails.
Son, by whom He even made the Son, But God's Word is one and the same,
and that the real Son is but notionally and as it is written, remaineth for
'
will, and for His providential care of all. For His speaking
many words would argue a feebleness in them all, each need-
ing the service of the other. But that God should have one
Word, which is the true doctrine, both shews the power of
God, and the perfection of the Word that is from Him, and
the religious understanding of them who thus believe.
4. that they would consent to confess the truth from § !'•
this their own statement for if they once grant that
! God
produces words, they plainly know Him to be a Father; and
acknowledging this, let them consider that, while they are
loth to ascribe one Word to God, they are imagining that
He Father
is of many ; and while they are loth to say that
there is no Word of God at all, yet they do not confess that
—
He is the Son of God, which is ignorance of the truth, and
inexperience in divine Scripture. For ifGod is altogether
Father of a word, wherefore is not He a Son that is be-
gotten ? And again, Son of God who should be, but His
Word ? For there are not many words, or each would be
imperfect, but one is the Word, that He only may be per-
fect,and because, God being one. His image too must be
one, which is the Son. For the Son of God, as may be learnt
p. 679.
consistent with each other, and vari-
"
they understood and acknow- ously represent one and the same
•>
If
ledg^ed the characteristic idea (xapaK- Person. "Son" and "Word," de-
Tf)pa) of Christianity, tliey would not
note His derivation; "Word" and
have said that the Lord of' glory was a "Image," His Similitude; "Word"
creature." ad Scrap, ii. 7. In Orat. i. and " Wisdcmi," His immateriality ;
§2. he says, Arians are not Christians "Wisdom" and "Hand," His co-
" If He is not Son, neither
existence.
AecffwsetheyareArians, for Christians
are called, iiot from Arius, but from is He Image." Orat. ii. § 2 [infra p.
" How there Word and Wis-
Christ, who is their only .Master, vid, 283]. is
also de Syn. § 38. init. Sent. D. fin. Ad dom, unless He be a proper oflfspring of
28 The Names of the Son
NicEN. Son, you have declared what is from the Father by nature; and
^^ if you
imagine the Word, you are thinking again of what is
from Him, and what is inseparable; and, speaking of Wisdom,
again you mean just as much, what is not from without, but
from Him and in Him and ;
if you name the Power and the
Hand, again you speak of what
proper to substance; and,is
speaking of the Image, you signify the Son; for what else is
like God but the offspring from Him ? Doubtless the things,
which came to be through the Word, these oxe founded in
Wisdoyn ; and what are laid in Wisdom, these are all made
by the Hand, and came to be through the Son. And we have
proof of this, not from external sources, but from the Scrip-
Is. 48, tures ; for God Himself says by Esaias the Prophet ; My
hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth, and My right
Is. 51, hand hath spanned the heavens. And again. And I have
^^-
covered them in the shadow of My Hand, that I may plant
the heavens, and lay the fonndaf Ions of the earth. And David
being taught this, and knowing that the Lord's H'and was
Ps. 104, nothing else than Wisdom, says in the Psalm, In ivisdom hast
24. Thou made them all ; the earth is full of Thy riches. Solomon
Prov. 3 ^^^o received the same from God, and said. The Lord hy
19- xcisdom hath founded the earth; and John, knowing that
John 1
^^^ Word was the Hand and the Wisdom, thus preached. In
1—3. t]ie beginning ivas theWord and the Word was ivith God,
and the Word was God; the same ivas in thebeginning
luith God : all things were made by Him, and without Him
was not any thing made. And the Apostle, understanding
that the Hand and the Wisdom and the Word was nothing
Heb. 1 ^1^6 than the Son, says, God, ivho at sundry times and in
1- 2. divers manners spake in time past unto the Fathers by the
that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invi-
sible, ivhether they be thrones, ordominions, or princiyalities,
or poivers ; were created
all things by Him and for Him;
and He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.
For as all tilings are created by the Word, so, because He is
the Image, are they also created in Him ^. And thus any one
who directs his thoughts to the Lord, will avoid stumbling
''
vid. a beautiful passage, contr. p. 391] where he speaks of Wisdom
" He as being infused into the world on its
Gent. 42. Again, of men,
&c'.
" a
made them after His own image, im- creation, that it might possess tyjje
parting to them of the power of His and semblance of Its Image."
proper Word, that, having as it were Siappaywaiv, and so Scrap,
'
ii. fin.
certain s/iadoivsof the Word, and be- SiappriypvcovTai. de Syi!. 34. Siappr^yvv-
Comingrational,Ao7iKol,tliey might be wan' iavrovs. Orat. ii. § 23. a-irapaT-
enabled to continue in blessedness." rerwcrav kavTovs. Orat. ii. § 64. rpi^eVco
Incarn. 3. vid. also Orat. ii. 78. [infra toi/j o^6vTas. Sent. D. 16.
CHAP. V.
"
DEFENCE OP THE COUNCIL'S PHRASES, FEOM THE SUBSTANCE/'
AND "one in SUBSTANCE."
ll'ptg
have heaped together the phrases," out ofnothing"," and "He
2
e'l ovK was not before His generation," and " once He was not," and
""'""' " "
alterable," and pre-existence," and "at the will;" which
are their fables in mockery of the Lord. For the blessed Paul
Heb. 11, in his Epistle to the Hebrews says, By faith we understand
3
that the ages %v ere
framed hy the Word of God, so that things
luhich are seen were not made of tilings ivMcli do a2ii:)ear. But
nothing is common to the Word with the ages "
; for He it
" After the Nicene Council, the a sort of positive existence, though not
Eusebians did not dare avow their an olffia or substance, and means the
heresy in Constantine's lifetime, l)ut sameas"world,"or an existing system
merely attempted the banishment of of things viewed apart from time and
Athanasius, and the restoration of motion, vid. Theodor. in Hebr. i. 2.
Arius. Tlieir first Council was A.l). Our Lord then is the Maker of the
341, four years after Constantine's ages thus considered, as the Apostle
death. also tells us, Hebr. xi. 3. and God is
the King of the ages, 1 Tim. i. 17- or
By aicnv, age, seems to be meant
"
is who is in existence before the ages, by whom also tlie ages Chap.
V.
came to be. And in tlie Slieplierd ^ it is written, (since tliey ^
" First
allege this book also, though it is not of the Canon ",) 2, 1. vid.
^^ ^^^'- ^•
of all believe, that God is one, who created all things, and
arranged them, and brought all things from nothing into
"
being ; but this again does not relate to the Son, for it
speaks concerning all things which came to be through Him,
from whom He is distinct ; for it is not possible to reckon
the Framer of all with the things made by Him, unless a man
is so beside himself as to say that the architect also is the
same as the buildings which he rears.
2. then, when they have invented on their part un-
Why
scriptural phrases, for the purposes of irreligion, do they
accuse those who are religious in their use of them ^ ? For
irreligiousness is utterly forbiden, though it be attempted
"
and " ages stands for eter-
of ages longs was not,' should be said not to
" " or mea- be ? for, if so, that interval in which
nity ;and tlien the ages
sures of duration, may be supposed they say the Son was not yet begotten
to stand for the iSeoi or ideas in the by the Father, precedes that V/isdom
Divine Mind, which seems to have of God which framed all things."
been a. Platonic or Gnostic notion. Theod. Hist. i. 3. p. 73(). vid also
Hence Synesius, Hymn iii. addresses Basil de Sp. S. n. 14. Hilar, de Trin.
the Almighty as alonvSTOKe, parent of xli.34.
the ages. Hence sonietimes God Him- "
And so in Ep. Fest. fin. he enu-
self is called the Age, Clem. Alex. merates it with Wi?^dom,Ecclesiasticus,
Hymn. Pied. iii. fin. or, the Age of Esther, Judith, Tobit, a.idothers, "not
ages, Pseudo-Dion.de Div. Nom.S.p. canonized butappointed by the Fathers
580. or again, aicijz'iys. Theodoret sums to be read by late converts and persons
"
up what has been said thus Age is : under teaching [Festal Epistles, o!) p.
not any subsisting substance, but is an 139 O.T.]." He calls it elsewhere a
interval indicative of time, now infi- most profitable book. Incarn. 3.
when God is spoken of, now com-
nite,
p Athan. here retorts the
chai'ge
mensurate with creation, now with brought against the Council, as it was
human life." Hacr. v. 6. If then, as obvious to do, which gave occasion for
Athan. says in the text, the Word is this Treatise. If the Council went be-
Maker of the ages. He is
independent yond Scripture in the use of the word
He does not "
of duration altogether ; substance," (which however can
come to be in time, but is above and hardly be granted,) who made this
beyond it, or eternal. Elsewhere he necessary, but they who had already
" The words addressed to the introduced the " the Son was
says, phrases,
Son in the 144th Psalm, 'Thy kingdom out of nothing,' &c. &c.? "Of the
" one in
is a kingdom of all ages,' forbid any substance," and substance,"
one to imagine any interval at all in were directly intended to contradict
which the Word did not exist. For and supplant the Arian unscriptural
if every interval is measured by ages, innovations, as he says beUtw, § 20.
and of all the ages the Word is King fin. 21. init. vid. also ad Afros. 6. de
and Maker, therefore, whereas no in- Synod. 37. He observes in like
§ 3(J,
terval at all exists prior to Him, it manner that the Arlan ayivnTos,
wert! madness to say,
'
There was though allowable as used by religious
once when the Everlasting (atcorios) men, de Syu. § 40. was unscriptural,
was " Orat. i. 12. Orat.
not.' [infra p. 198] i. § 30, 34. Also Epiph. H.-cr.
And so Alexander " Is it not unrea-
; p. 941. IJasil. contr.
7fi. Eunom. i. o.
sonal)le that He who made times, ami Hilar, contr. Const. 10". Ambros. In-
ages, and seasons, to all of which be- carn. 80.
32 "
History of the Nicene symbol, Of the Substance."
NicEN. to disguise with artful expressions and plausible sophisms ;
it
—^— but
'
is confessed by all to be lawful, even though
religiousness
vid.
presented in strange phrases ^, provided only they are used
note "m.
with a religious view, and a wish to make them the expres-
sion of religious thoughts. Now the aforesaid grovelling
phrases of Christ's enemies, have been shewn in these re-
marks to be both formerly and now replete with irreligion ;
the Scriptures, that the Son is not from nothing but from
Oocl, and is Word and Wisdom, nor creature or work, but the
miglit not be considered common and equal in the Son and Chap.
in things generate^but thatallothers might be acknowledged —— -^
the sense in which the Son is from Him ; for as to the crea-
tureSj"of God" is said of them on this account, in that they
exist not atrandom or spontaneously, nor come to be by
chance^, according to those philosophers who refer them to i
vid. de
the combination of atoms, and to elements of similar struc- f^Il'
—nor as certain heretics speak of a distinct Framer, —
ture,
§ So.
D
" >}
34 History of the Nicene Symbol One in substance
NicEN. not as if all things were from the Father as the Son is. For
- neither are other things as the Son, nor is the Word one
among others, for He is Lord and Framer of all ; and on this
account did the Holy Council declare expressly that he was
of the substance ^ of the Father, that we might believe the
Word to be other than the nature of things generate, being
alone truly from God ; and that no subterfuge should be left
open to the irreligious. This then was the reason why the
Council wrote " of the substance."
§ 20. 4. Again, when the Bishops said that the Word must be
described as the True Power and Image of the Father, like
1
ctirapaA- to the Father in all things and unvarying^, and as unalterable,
\aKTOf
^^^ g^g always, and as in Him without division ; (for never
was the Word not, but He was always, existing everlastingly
with the Father, as the radiance of light,) the party of Euse-
bius endured indeed, as not dai'ing to contradict, being put
to shame by the arguments which were urged against them ;
^
but withal they were caught whispering to each other and
winking with their eyes, that "like," and "always," and
''power," and "in Him," were, as before, common to us and
the Son, and that it was no difficulty to agree to these. As
"
ICor. 11, to like," they said that it is written of us, Man is the image
"
2Y- 4
ci^^'-^
9^ory of God; always," that it was written. For we which
11. live are alway ;
" in Him," In Him we live and move and have
Acts 17,
'^unalterable," that written. Nothing shall
.
^^jj. it is
jygiiig
Rom. "
8, separate its
from the love of Christ; as to power," that the
'J*^]p ^^^^^^ caterpillar and the locust are
called j^ower, and great j^ower,
separate and thatoften said of the people, for instance. All
it is
am,' T^ hv, is really proper to God and Arians, that our Lord was from some-
is a whole, bounded or mutilated nei- thing distinct from God, and in conse-
ther by aught before Him, nor after quenceof created substance. Moreover
Him, for He neither was, nor shall the term expresses the idea of God
be." Naz. Orat. 30. 18 fin. Also Cyril /)os<7nWi/, in contradistinction tone-
Dial, i. p. 392. Damasc. Fid. Orth. i. gative epithets, such as infinite, im-
9. and the Semiarians at Ancyra, mense, eternal, &c. Damasc. Fid.
" Ortliod. i. 4. and as little implies any
Epiph. Hcer. 73. 12 init. By the es-
" substance" of
sence," however, or, thing distinct from God as those
God, the Council did not mean any epithets do.
Necessity of it to explain "Image of God.'' 35
of "powers is with us, the God of Jacob is our refuge. Indeed Chap.
Asterius, by title the sophist, had said the like in writing, —— _: .
taken it also, as has been said. But the Bishops, discern- i3^ref.*2.
after his own pattern ;) but since the generation of the Son
'
vid. ad Afros, 5.6. ad Scrap, ii. 5. Father, but in the sense in which a
S. Ambrose tells ns, that a Letter picture is like the
original, differing
written by Eusebius of Niconiedia, in from it in substance anH. iu fact. In
which he said, "If we call him true this sense theyeven allowed the strong
Son of the Father and uncreate, then word airapdWaKTos inivari/ing iiimge,
are we granting that He is one in vid.beginning of § 20. [supra p. 34]
substance, o/xoovatov," determined the which had been used by the Catholics,
Council on the adoption of the term. (vid. Alexander, ap. Theod. Hist. i.
de Fid. iii. n. 125. He had disclaimed 3. p. 740.) as by the Semiarians after-
"of the substance," in his Letter to wards, who even added the words kot'
Paulinus. Theod. Hist. i. 4. Arius, how- ovaiav, ov "according to substance."
ever, had disclaimed Ojuooivtrio;' already. Even this strong phrase, however,
Epiph. Hair. 69. 7. It was a word of /car' ovaiav aTcapdWuKTos ukuv, or
old usage in the Church, as Eusebius airapaWaKTus ojxows, did notappear
of Csesarea confesses in his Letter, to the Council an adequate safeguard
infr. Tertullian in Prax. 13 fin. has of the doctrine. Athan. notices de Syn.
the translation " unius substantiie," that " like " applies to qualities rather
(vid. Lucifer de non Pare. p. 218.) as than to substance, § 53. Also Basil,
he has " de substantia Patris," in Ep. 8. n. 3. "while in itself," says the
Prax. 4. and Origen perhaps used the same Father, " it is frequently used of
word, vid. Pamph. Apol. 5. and Theo- faint similitudes, and falling very far
gnostus and the two Dionysius's, />(/>•«, short of the original." Ep. 9. n. 3. Ae-
§ 25.26. And before them Clement had cordingly, the Council determined on
spoken of the evwais ttjs ixovaSiKr)^ the word 6yuoov(r(Oj' as implying, as the
ovffias, "the union of the single sub- text expresses it, " the same in like-
stance," vid. Le Quien in Damasc. Fid. ness," ravrhv tj7 oixoiwcret, that the
Ortli. i. 8. Novatian too has
" likeness might not be analogical, vid.
per sub-
stantife conimunionem," de Trinit. 31. the passage about gold and brass, p. 40.
"
The Eusebians allowed that our below, Cyril in Joan. I. iii. c. v. p. 302.
Lord was like and the image of the [p. 351 O.T.]
D 2
36 Those, who do not reject the Council's sense, will not its words .
terms are strange, let them consider the sense in which the
Council so wi'ote, and anathematize what the Council ana-
thematized; and then if they can, let them find fault with the
expressions. But I well know that, if they hold the sense
of the Council, they will fully accept the terms in which it
3
vid. p. is conveyed whereas if it be the sense ^ which they wish to
;
they still complain that such are not scriptural, that very
complaint is a reason why they should be cast out, as talk-
ing idly and disordered in mind ; and next why they should
blame themselves in this matter, for they set the example,
beginning their war against God with words not in Scrip-
ture. However, if a person is interested in the question,
lethim know, that, even if the expressions are not in so
many words in the Scriptures, yet, as was said before, they
Its sense in Scri_pture, if not its words. 37
contain the sense of the Scriptures^ and expressing it, they Chap.
nifies to the Jews about Himself, If God ivere your Father, John 8,
^^'
ye would love Me; for I i^roceeded forth from the Father.
And again; Not that any one lias seen the Father, save He ib,6,46.
ivhich is from God, He hath seen the Father. And more-
over, I and My Father are one, and, I in the Father and }^-
1<^.
speaks of it, Orat. iv. 3. [infra pp. 516, son?" moreover that fruits of theearth
" If are called offspring, ("I will not drink
517J as virtually Scriptural. any
one declines to say ' offspring,' and of the offspring of this vine,") rarely
only says that the Word exists with animated things, except indeed in
God, let such a one fear lest, dedin- such instances as, " O generation
ing an e.rprcssinn of Scripftire (rh (offspring) of vipers." Nyssen defends
he fall into extravagance,
AeyoiJ.ei'oi')
his brother, contr. Eunom. Orat iii.
&c." Yet Basil, contr. Eunom. ii. p. 1(»5. In the Arian formula "an
6—8. explicitly disavows the word, as offspring, but not as one of the
an unscriptural invention of Euno- offsprings," it is synonymous with
niius. " That the Father begat we are "work" or "creature." On the other
taught in many places that the Son
: hand Epiphanius uses it, e. g. Hxr.
is an offspring we never heard up to 76. n. 8. and Naz. Orat. 29. n. 2.
this dav, for Scripture says, "unto Eusebins, Dennmstr.Ev.iv. 2. Fseudo-
ns a e/ii/d is born, unto us a son is Basil, adv. Eunom. iv. j). 280. fin.
ingenerateness, present to us His sub- Also Basil, " The substance is not any
stance." Orat. 28. 9. And S. Augustine, one of things which do not attach, but
''Of the subdance" only brings out the meaning of ''Son." 39
let no one be startled on hearing that the Son of God is from Chap.
the substance of the Father; rather let him accept the '—
explanation of the Fathers, who in more explicit but equi-
valent language have for from God written " of the sub-
stance/' For they considered it the same thing to say that
Word was " of the substance of
the of God and God/' since
the word " I have already said, signifies nothing
God/' as
but the substance of Him Who Is. If then the Word is not
in such sense from God, as to be Son, genuine and natural,
from the Father, but only as creatures because they are
framed, and as all things are from God, then neither is He
from the substance of the Father, nor is the Son again Son
according to substance, but in consequence of virtue, as we
who are called sons by grace. But if He only is from God,
as a genuine Son, as He is, then let the Son, as is reasonable,
be called from the substance of God.
9. Again, the illustration of the Light and the Radiance § 23.
has this meaning. For the Saints have not said that the
Word was related to God as fire kindled from the heat of
the sun, which is commonly put out again, for this is an ex-
ternal work and a creature of its author, but they all preach
of Him as Radiance'', thereby to signify His being from the
substance, proper and^ indivisible, and His oneness with aSialpe-
^
the Fathi :r. This also will secure His true"^ unalterableness J^'j, j{_
and immutability ; for how can these be His, unless He be rpeir-rov
Kal a,va\-
is the very being of God." contr. Eun. a lamp divided into two, wliich after xoiiorov
i. 10 fin.
" The nature of (jod is no all was Arian doctrine. Athanasius
other than Himself, for He is simple refers to fire, Orat. iv. § 2 and 10. but
and uncompounded." Cyril Thesaur. still to fire and its radiance. How-
" When we ever we find the illustration of fire
p. 59. say the power of
the Father, we say nothing else than from fire, Justin. Tryph. (51. [p. 149
the substance of the Father." August. O.T.] Tatian contr. Grsec. 5. At this
de Trin. vii. 6. And so Numenius in early day the illustration of radiance
" Let no one
Eusebius, deride, if I say might have a Sabellian bearing, as
that the name of the Immaterial is that of fire in Athan.'s had an Arian.
substance and being." Priep. Evang. Hence Justin protests against those
xi. 10. who considered the Son as " like the
I*
Athan.'s ordinary illustration is, as sun's light in the heaven," which
" " " when it
here, not from fire," but from ra- sets, goes away with it,"
diance," airavyaaixa, after S. Paul and whereas it is as " fire kindled from
the Author of the Book of Wisdom, fire." Trj-ph. 128. [p. 229, 230 O.T.]
meaning by radiance the light which Athenagoras, however, like Athan-
" as
a light diffuses by means of the atmo- asius, says light from fire," using
sphere. On the other hand Arius in also the word airoppoia, effluence : vid.
his letter to Alexander, Epiph. Hjcr. also Orig. Periarch. i. 2. n. 4. TeituU.
69. 7. spe^iks against the doctrine of Ap. 21. [p.47.0.T.] Theognostus infr.
Hieracas that the Son was from the § 25.
Father as a light from a light or as
40 " One in substance" hut brings out the.meaning.of ''Image."
41. Hyp. ai'e considered like, yet they differ in substance. If then
Mel.et j^ "be ^]2us with the Son, let Him be a creature as we are,
paWaK- the words "Offspring" and "Son" bear, and are meant to
bear, no human sense, but one suitable to God, in like manner
'^'"'
this they fell from the truth, and were declared to be heretics.
For if He partakes in fulness the light from the Father, why
is He not rather that which others
"
partake ^, that there be no vid. p.
medium introduced betweenHimself and the Father? Other- e.^•""**'
wise, it is no longer clear that all things were generated by
the Son, but by Him, of whom He too partakes ^. And if
NicEN. this is the Word, the Wisdom of the Father, in whom the
^ Father is revealed and known, and frames the world, and
without whom the Father doth nothing, evidently He it is
who is from the Father for all things generated partake of
:
" The substance of the Son is not any tlung- procured from
without, nor accruing out of nothing'', but it sprang from the
Father's substance, as the radiance of light, as the vapour'' of
water ; for neitlier the radiance, nor the vapour, is the water
itself or tlie sun itself, nor is it alien ; but it is an effluence of the
Father's substance, Avhich, however, suffers no partition. For as
the sun remains the same, and is not impaired by the rays poured
forth by it, so neither does the Fatlier's substance suffer change,
though it lias the Son as an Image of Itself*^."
*
Athahasius elscwliere "
calls hitn investigating' by way of exercise."
" the admirable and excellent." ad Eusebius does not mention him at all.
" (iod was
Scrap, iv. 9. He was Master of the Vid. above 15. fin.
*>
§
Catechetical school of Alexandria alone," says Tertullian," because tliere
towards the end of the 3d century, was nothing external to Him, e.vfrin-
being a scholar, or at least a follower srcus ; yet not even tlien alone, for
of Origen. His seven books of Hypo- He had with Him, what He had in
of an
NicEN. Theognostus then, after first investigating in the way
^^^- sentiments in the
exercise % proceeds to lay down his
foregoing words.
But I am
sure from recollection that I adduced parallels of things
kindred with each other; for instance, that a |)lant grown from
seed or from root, was other than that from which it sprang, yet
was altogether one in nature with it^: and that a stream flowing
from a fountain, gained a new name, for that neither the fountain
was called stream, nor the stream fountain, and both existed, and the
stream was the water from the fountain."
others." Orat. 42. 15. also Orat. 20. 7. ad Naz. Orat. 20. (>. Basil
.Vntiocii. 5.
and Epiph. Hier. 57. 5. Tertullian, denies rpiis apxiKal inroffTaafts, ilo-
before Dionysius, uses the word Mo- Sp. S. 38. which is a Platonic phrase.
46 Heresy of Tritheism.
the Father, and the Father the Son, but they in some sort preach
three Gods, as dividing the Holy Unity into three subsistences
foreign to each other and utterly separate. For it must needs be
that with the God of the Universe, the Divine Word is one, and
1 i
^
Holy Ghost must repose and habitate in God thus in one as
ffKpiXo- ^]jg
;
X'^P^^"
jjj ^ summit, I mean the God of the Universe, must the Divine
For if He came to be Son, once He was not but He was always, Chap. ;
not made thee and created thee ? says Moses in his great song in 6.
Deuteronomy. And one may say to them, men of great hazard, O
isHe a work, who is the First-born of every creature, who is born Col. 1,
from the womb before the morning star, who said, as Wisdom, J5.
Before all the hills He begets Me?
And in many passages of the ^*" ^^**»
'
divine oracles is the Son said to have been generated, but no where „'. o
to have"- come into being; which manifestly convicts those of mis- 25.
conception about the Lord's generation, who presume to call His
1
yiynr.
divine and ineffable generation a making ^ Neither then may we "^o"^"'
"
divide into three Godheads the wonderful and divine Unity nor ;
y^"^^-
""'
disparage with the name of 'work' the dignity and exceeding
majesty of the Lord ; but M'e must believe in God the Father
Almighty, and in Christ Jesus His Son, and in the Holy Ghost,
and hold that to the God of the universe the Word is united. For
/, says He, and the Father are one ; and, / in the Father and the
'
Tliis extract discloses to us, (in con- that not at first sight an obvious
one,
nexion with the passages from Diony- which is found among' the Arians,
sins Alex, here and in tlie de Sent. D.) Prov. viii. 22. 3. The same texts were
a remarkable anticipation of the Arian used by tiie Catholics, which occur in
controversy in the third century. Lit the Arian controversy, e. g^. Deut.
appears that the very symbol of i]v Sre xxxii.6. against Prov. viii. 22. and such
" once He was
ovii ?iv, not," was as- as Ps. ex. 3. Prov. viii. 25. and the two
serted or implied ; vid. also the follow- John x. 30. and xiv. 10. 4. The same
ing extract from Origen, § 27. and Catholic symbols and statements are
Origen Periarchon, iv. 28. where men- found, e.g. "begotten not made," "one
tion is also made of the e| ovk uvtodv, in substance,"
" "
Trinity, aSialpeTov,
" outof
nothing," which was the Arian &vapxoi>, aeiyevh, light from light, &c.
" Much might be said on this circum-
symbol in opposition to of the sub-
stance." Allusions are made besides, staiu-e, as forming part of the proof of
to "the Father not being always Fa- the very early date of the developnu-nt
" th(i Word
tber," de Sent. D. 15. and and formation of the Catholic tlieo-
beingbrought tobe by the true Word, logy, which we are at first sight
and Wisdom by the true Wisdom ;" apt to ascribe to the 4tli and 5th ceii-
ibid. 25. 2. The same special text is turies.
used in defence of the heresy, and •
48 The labour-loving Origen.
NicEN. Father in Me. For thus both the Divine Trinity, and the holy
I^EF.
preaching of the Monarchy, will be preserved."
the Father, never was it not. For else was that God, who, ac-
cording to John, is called Light, (for God is Light,) without the
radiance of His proper glory, that a man should presume to assert
the Son's origin of existence, as if before He was not. But
when was not that Image of the Father's Ineffable and Nameless
and Unutterable subsistence, that Expression and Word, and He
that knows the Father ? for let him understand well who dares to
'
say,
'
Once the Son was not, that he is saying, Once Wisdom was '
"
and Word was not, and Life was not.'
' ' ' '
not,
""
and so Scrap, iv. 9. " aWa. Certe
(pLXoTvSvov, <pp6vnfj.d ia-ri. legfendum
"
& ws (nTwv Ka\ yvixvd(oov typa-
ixev aW' k, idque omnino exi^it sensas."
4'e, ravTo. fx)) wi avrov (ppoyovvTos Se- Montfaucon. Rather for dSecDs read &
XfcrOca ris, dWa twv nphs tptv <piXovei- Se i)s, and put the stop at ^Tjreij/ in-
KovvTwv iv dSews 6pi(wv
Ttf
(rjTe'ii', stead of SexfVSco ris.
diTO(paiv€Tat, tovto rod (pi\oir6vov rh
Tlie Nicene Council did hut consign tradition to writing. 49
your phrases ? Not one of tlie understanding and wise for ; Chap.
VI,
allabhor you, but the devil alone ^ none but he is your ; j
father in this apostasy, who both in the beginning scattered q!' noVe^s.
on you the seed of this irreligiou, and now persuades you to
slander the Ecumenical Council", for committing to writing,
not your doctrines, but that which from the beginning those
who were eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word have
handed down to us p. For the faith which the Council has
°
vid. supr. § 4. Orat. i. § 7. Ad Afros spoke of Christ, and He Himself in-
2, twice. Apol. contr. Arian. 7. ad Ep. structed us, and the creed of the Fa-
M^. 5. Epiph. Hfer. 7(». 9. Euseb. Vit. thers has delivered to us," whereas
Const, iii. 6. The Council was more " other faith it is not lawful for
any to
commonly called /xiydhri vid. supr. § bring forth, or to write, or to draw up,
26. The second General Council, A. D. or to hold, or to teach." p. 456. [1460
381, took the name of ecumenical, ed. Col.] vid. S. Leo. supr. p. 5. note
vid. Can. 6. fin. but incidentally. The m. This, however, did not interfere
Council of Ephesus so styles itself in with their adding without undoing,
the opening of its Synodical Letter. " For" " if it were un-
says Vigilius,
p The
profession under which the lawful to receive aught further after
decrees of Councils come to us is that the Nicene statutes, on what authority
of setting forth in writing what has venture we to assert that the Holy
ever been held orally or implicitly in Ghost is of one substance with the Fa-
the Church. Hence the frequent use ther, which it is notorious was there
of such phrases as iyyparpoos i^eredr] omitted ?" contr. Eutych. v. init. he ;
with reference to them. Thus Dama- gives other instances, some in point,
sus, Theod. Hist. v. 10. speaks of that others not. vid. also Eulogius, apud
"apostolical faith, which was set forth Phot. Cod. 23. pp. 829. 853. Yet to
in writing' by the Fathers in Nic£ea." add to the confession of the Church is
On the other hand, Ephrem of Antioch, not to add to the faith, since nothing
speaks of the doctrine of our Lord's can be added to the faith. Leo, Ep. 124.
" inculcated
perfect humanity being p. 1237. Nay, Athan. says that the
by our Holy Fathers, but not as yet Nicene faith is sufficient to refute
[i. e. till the Council of Chalcedon] every heresy, ad Max. 5. fin. also Leo.
being confirmed by the decree of an Ep. 54. p. 956. and Naz. Ep. 102. init.
ecumenical Council." Phot. 229. p. excepting, however,the doctrineof the
801. (iyypa(f>oi)s, however, sometimes Holy Spirit ;
which explains his mean-
relates to the act of subscribing. Phot. ing. The Henoticon of Zeno says the
ibid, or to Scripture, Clement. Strom. same, but with the intention of dealing
i.
321.) Hence Athan. says ad
init. p. a blow at the Council of Chalcedon.
" the Woi'-d of
Afros, Land 2. that Evagr. iii. 14. p. 345. Aetius at Chalce-
the Lord which was given through the don says that at Ephesus and Chalcedon
ecumenical Council in Nicsea remain- the Fathers did not profess to draw up
ethfor ever;" and uses against its op- an exposition of faith, and that Cyril
" Remove not the and Leo did but interpret the Creed,
posers the texts,
ancient landmark which thy fathers Cone. t. 2. p. 428. [t. iv. 1430, 1431
have set" (vid. also Dionysius in Eus. ed. Col.] [see this whole subject very
" He that curseth his in Dr. Pusey's On the
Hist. vii. 7.), and amply treated
father or his mother, shall surely be put (Jlattse, And the Son, pp. 76 sqq.]
to death." Prov.xxii. 28. Ex.xxi. 17. Leo even says that the Apostles'
vid. also Athan. ad Epict. 1. And the Creed is sufficient against all heresies,
and tliat Eiityches erred on a point
Council of professes to
Chalcedon
" drive " of which our Lord wished no one
away the doctrines of error by
a common decree, and reneiv the un- of either sex in the Church to be igno-
swerving faith of the Fathers," Act. v. rant," ami he wishes Eutyches to take
the plenitude of the Creed
"
p. 452. [t. iv. 1453 ed. Col.] "as," they puro et
" from of old the
proceed, prophets simplici corde." Ep. 31. p. 857, 8.
E
50 Avians quarrelled with the sense, not the words merely.
This term afterwards adopted by them and why three senses of it. A fourth
; ;
1. This in fact was the reason, wlien the unsound nature Chap.
of their phrases had been exposed at that time, and they XIL-
"^ "
were henceforth open to the charge of irreligion, that they j
»
ayfvrjTov. Opportunity will occur tal ;" but Athan. is referring' to an-
for noticing this celebrated word on other subject, the Platonic, or rather
Orat. i. 30 —34. where the present the Eclectic Trinity. ThusTheodoret,
"
passage is partly re-written, partly Plotinus, and Numenius, explaining
transcribed. Mention is also made of the sense of Plato, say, that he taug-ht
it in the De
Syn. 46, 47. Athanasius Three principles beyond time and etcr-
woidd seem have been but partially
to nal, Good, Intellect, and the Soul of
the de Affect. Cur. ii. p. 750. And
acquainted with the writings of all,"
" It is as if one
Anomoeans, whose sjmbol it was, and so Plotinus himself,
to have argued with them from the were to place Good as the centre, In-
who had tellect like an immoveable circleroimd,
writings of the elder Arians,
also made use of it. and Soul a moveable circle, and move-
^
Montfaucon quotes a passage from able l)y appetite." 4 Ennead. iv. c. 1 6.
Plato's Phffidrus, in which the hiunan vid. Porphyry in Cyril, contr. Julian,
"
soul is called ingenerate and immor- viii. t. ult. p. 271. vid. ibid. i. p. 32.
E 2
52 Avians used phrases, neither in nor according to Scripture.
NiCEN. say tlie like tliemselves^ or else not speak at all^ of wliat
Def.
they do not know. But if they consider they are acquainted
with the subject, then they must be interrogated ; for the "^
31. note expression is not from divine Scripture ^, but they are con-
P- tentious, as elsewhere, for unscriptural positions. Just as
I have related the reason and sense, with which the Council
and the Fathers before it defined and published " of the
" one in
su^Dstance,'^ and substance,'^ agreeably to what
Scripture says of the Saviour ;
so now let them if they can,
answer on their part what has led them to this unscriptural
phrase, and in what sense they call God Ingenerate ?
2. In truth, I am told that the name has different senses ;
'^,
Hist. ii. 50. S.Oregory Naz. says, that merated, Orat. i. § 30 [infra pp. 225,
he gave some attention, but not much, 226] 1 What is not as yet, but is possi-
. .
to the subjects of general education, ble 2. what neither has been nor can
;
tS)v iyKVKXiuv, that he might not be be; 3. what exists, but has not come to
altogether ignorant, of what he never- be from any cause ; 4. what is not made,
theless despised, Orat. 21. 6. In the but is ever. Only two senses are spe-
same way S. Basil, whose cultivation cified in the de Syn. § 46. and in these
of mind none can doubt, speaks slight- the question really lies 1. what is,
;
ing to the first, things that already have come to be, and —- - —
things that are expected to be, are ingenerate; and the second
is more extravagant still; accordingly they will proceed to the
third sense, and use the word in it ; though here, in this sense
too, their irreligion will be quite as great. For if by Ingene-
rate they mean what has no origin of being, nor is generated
or created, but eternal, and say that the Word of God is con-
trary to this, who comprehends not the craft of these foes of
God ? who but would stone ^
such madmen ? for, when they
are ashamed to bring forward again those first phrases which
they fabled, and which were condemned, the bad men have
taken another way to signify them, by means of what they call
Ingenerate. Son be of things generate, it follows,
For if the
''
NicEN, of
God, yet miglit cherish a concealed blasphemy against the
—Hi_ Lord, and under this covering might teach it to others.
3. However, on the detecting of this
sophism, what re-
mains to them ? " We
have found another,'^ say the evildoers ;
and then proceed to add to what they have said already,
that Ingenerate means what has no author of
being, but
stands itself in this relation to things generate. Unthankfal,
and in truth deaf to the Scriptures who do every thing', !
iSiov
*^® things generate, and alone a proper ^ offspring of the
whom all things came to be and consist ^.
Father, through
§ 30.
In like4.manner, when the Prophets spoke of God as
All-powerful, they did not so name Him, as if the Word were
included in that All -; (for they knew that the Son was other
than things generate, and Sovereign over them Himself,
according to His likeness to the Father;) but because He is
Sovereign over all things which through the Son He has
^ The whole 32. &c. vid. for this par-
of tliis
passage is repeated in Orat. 1.
made, and has given the authority of all things to the Son, Chap.
and having given it, is Himself once more the Lord of all '-
Lord of the powers^, they said not this as if the Word was of hosts,
one of those powers, but because, while He is Father of the
Son, He is Lord of the powers which through the Son have
come to be. For again, the Word too, as being in the
Father, is Lord of them all, and Sovereign over all ; for all
things, whatsoever the Father hath, are the Son^s. This then
being the force of such titles, in like manner let a man call
God ingenerate, if it so please him ; not however as if the
Word were of generate things, but because, as I said before,
God not only is not generate, but through His proper
Word is He the maker of things which are so. For though
the Father be called such, still the Word is the Father's
Image, and one in substance with Him; and being His
Image, He must be distinct from things generate, and from
every thing; for whose Image He is, to Him hath He it to be
proper- and to be like: so that he who calls the Father in-
"'^'?'"5n)-
. . . T7JTO
generate and almighty, perceives in the Ingenerate and the
Almighty, His Word and His Wisdom, which is the Son,
But these wondrous men, and prompt for irreligion, hit
from the Son and to call Him Father, than to name Him
and call Him Ingenerate from His works only ; for the latter
term refers to the works that have come to be at the will of
God the Word, but the name of Father points out
through
the proper offspring from His substance. And whereas the
Word surpasses things generate, by so much and more also
56 Father, not Ingenerate, the Scripture term.
xii. 15 ;
but his " proprium" is a trans- sence of the Holy Spirit in the regen-
lation of iSLov, not Kvpiois. And when erate in substance, (vid. Cyril. Dial.
Justin says of Christ 6 /xovos Xeydfieuos 7. p. 638.) constitutes this relation-
Kvpitas vlhs, Apol. ii. 6. [p. 62 O.T.] ship of nature; and hence after the
Kvpiws seems to be used in reference to words quoted from S. Cyril in the
the word K^pioyLord, which he has just beginning of the note, in which he
been using, Kvpio\oyi7v, being some- says, that we are sons, (^utriwoj j, he pro-
times used by himasothers in the sense " because we are in
ceeds, naturally,
of "naming as Lord," like deo\oye7v. Him, and in Him alone." vid. Athan.'s
Novel terms of heresy met hy new terms of orthodoxy . 57
words which follow in the text at fulness of the Christian privileges, vid.
the end of § 31. And hence Nys- supr. p. .33. note q.
sen lays down, as a received truth, '" The
holy and inspired Scriptures
that "to none does the term proper,' '
are sufficient of themselves for the
KvpLcirarov, apply, but to one in whom preaching of the truth yet there .are
:
the name responds with truth to the also many treatises of our blessed
nature," contr. Eunom. iii.
p. 123. teachers composed for this purpose."
And he also implies, " For
p. 117, the inti- contr. Gent. init.
studying and
mate association of our sonship with mastering the Scriptures, there is need
Christ's, when he connects together of a good life and a pure soul, and
regeneration with our Lord's eternal virtue according to Christ," Incarn.
" Since divine
generation, neither being 5ia iraOovs, 57. Scripture is more
or, of the will of the flesh. If it be sufficient than any thing else, I re-
asked, what the distinctive words are commend persons who wish to know
which are incommunicably the Son's, "
fully concerning these things (the
since so much is man's, it is obvious to doctrine of the blessed Trinity), "to
answer, and fxavojivris, which
IfSios nibs read the divine oracles," ad Ep. ^g. 4.
are in Scripture, and thesymbols" of the [Hist, tractsp. l,30O.T.] "The Scrip-
substance," and "one in substance," tures a?-e sufficient for teadiiiig; l)ut it
of the C'ouncil and this is the value of
;
is good for us to exliort each other in
the Council's phrases, that, while they the faitli, and to refresh eacii otiicr
guard the Son's divinity, they allow witii discourses." Vit.S. Ant. IG. And
full scope, without risk of entrenching passim in Athan.
on it,to the Catholic doctrine of the
58 Cunclusion.
NicEN.
dispositions. The term Ingenerate, having its own sense,
^ and admitting of a religious use, they nevertheless^ accord-
ing to their own idea, and as they willj use for the dishonour
of the Saviour^ all for the sake of contentiously maintain-
ing, like giants"^, their fight with God. But as they did
not escape condemnation when they adduced these former
phrases, so when they misconceive of the Ingenerate which
in itself admits of being used well and religiously, they were
ing what was formerly done in the Council ; but I know that
the contentious among Christ^s foes will not be disposed to
change even after hearing this, but will ever search about
for other pretences, and for others again after those. For
Jer. 13, as the Prophet speaks. If the FAhiopian change his sJcin, or
the Jeopard his spots, then will they be willing to think
religiously, who have been instructed in irreligion. Thou
however, Beloved, on receiving this, read it
by thyself; and
ifthou approvest of it, read it also to the brethren who
happen to be present, that they too on hearing it, may
welcome the Council's zeal for the truth, and the exactness
of its sense ; and may condemn that of Christ's foes, the
ArianSj and the futile pretences, which for the sake of their
irreligious heresy they have been at the pains to frame for
each other; because to God and the Father is due the
glory, honour, and worship with His co-existent Son and
Word, together with the All-holy and Life-giving Spirit,
now and unto endless ages of ages. Amen.
™ And so, Orat. ii. § 32 the Arian ascendancy. Also Socr.
[infra, p.
325] KaTUTohs fj-vOevo/xevovs ylyavras.
. V. 10. p. 268. d. Sometimes the Scrip-
AndsoNazianzen,Orat. 43. 26. speak- tiiregiants are spoken of, sometimes
*
This Letter is also found in Socr. purple. He
confesses, however, he did
Hist. i. 8. Theod. Hist. i. Gelas. Hist, not sit down until the Bishops bade
Nic.ii. 34. p. 442. Niceph. Hist. viii. 22. liiin. Again at the same Council,
*>
And so infr. "most pious," § 4. "with pleasant eyes looking serenity
" most wise and most itself into them all, collecting himself,
religious," ibid,
"most religious," § 8. § 10. Euse- and in a quiet and gentle voice" he
bius observes in his Vit. Const, the made an oration to the Fathers upon
same tone concerning Constantine, peace. Constantine had been an in-
and assigns to him the same office in strument in conferring such vast
determining the faith (being as yet benefits, humanly speaking, on the
unbaptized). E.g. "When there were Christian Body, that it is not won-
differences between persons of differ- derful that otlier writers of the day
ent countries, as if some common besides Eusebius should praise him.
" of sacred
bishop appointed by God, he con- Hilary speaks of him as
venedCouncils of God's ministers; and memory," Fragm. 5. init. Athanasius
not disdaining to be present and to sit calls him "most pious," Apol. contr.
amid their conferences," &c. 1. 44. Arian. 9; "of blessed memorj'," ad
When he came into the Nicene Coun- Ep. /Eg. 18. 19. Epiphanius "most
oil, "it was," says Eusebius, "assume religious and of ever-blessed memory,"
heavenly Angel of God," iii. 10. al- Ha;r. 70. 9. Posterity, as was natural,
lading to the brilliancy of the imperial was still more grateful.
60 Letter of Eusehius of Gcesarea
made flesh, and lived among men, and sufl^ered, and rose again
the tliird day, and ascended to the Father, and will come again in
glory to judge the quick and dead.
And we believe also in One Holy Ghost; believing each of
These to be and to exist, the Father truly Father, and the Son
also our
truly Son, and the Holy Ghost truly Holy Ghost, as
Matt. 28, Lord, sending forth His disciples for the preachhig, said. Go
19. teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and
of the So7i, and of the Holy Ghost. Concerning whom we con-
fidently affirm that so we liold, and so we think, and so we have
held aforetime, and we maintain this faith unto the death, anathe-
matizing even,- godless heresy. That this we have ever thought
fi-om our heart and soul, from the time we recollect ourselves, and
now think and say in truth, before God Almighty and our Lord
Jesus Christ do we witness, being able by proofs to shew and to
convince you, that, even in times past, such has been our belief
and preaching.
of yourselves and those who hear you; the Scriptures but altogether this?
namely, that holy faith of the Ca- that God made the world by the
tholic Church, as the holy and only Word,"&c.&c.Procl.adArmen.p.612.
" That
Virgin of God received its custody God, the Word, after the union
from the holy Apostles of the Lord ; remained such as He was, &c. so dear-
and thus, in the case of each of those ly hath divine Scripture,
and more-
who are under catechising, who are over the doctors of the Clnuches,
to approach the Holy Laver, ye ought and the lights of the world taught us."
not only to preach faith to yoin- chil- Theodor. Dial. 3. init. "That it is the
dren in the Lord, but also to teach tradition of the Fathers is not the
them expressly, as your common mo- whole of our case; for they too follow-
ther teaches, to say believe in :
'
We ed the meaning of Scripture, starting
One God,'" &c. Epiph. Ancor. 119. from the testimonies, which just now
fin. who thereupon proceeds to give at we laid before you from Scripture."
length the Xiceno-Constantinopolitan Basil de Sp. § 16. vid. also a remark-
Creed. And so Athan. speaks of the able passage in de Synod. §6. fin. infra.
to the
'people of his Diocese. 61
made flesh, was made man, suffered, and rose again the third day,
ascended into heaven, and cometh to judge quick and dead.
" And in the
Holy Ghost.
" And those who Once He was not,' and Before His
' '
say,
generation He was not,' and He came to be from nothing,' or
'
''
The only clauses of the Creed the former shall be reserved for a
which admit of any question in their later part of the volume ; the latter is
explanation, are the "He was not treated of in a note at the end of this
" of other
before His generation," and Treatise ; infr. p. C^Q.
subsistence or substance." Of these
62 Letter of Eusehius of Ccesarea
NicEN. place, and the meaning of tlie words underwent the scrutiny
of reason. And they professed, that the phrase " of the sub-
^^^'
^
Eusebius does not commit him- power as a sort of matter and sub~
self to any positive sense in wliich stance of the production and constitu-
the formula " of the substance " is tion of the universe, so that it is not
to be interpreted, but only says what reasonably said, that any thing is out
it does not mean. His comment on of nothing. For what is from nothing
" of the cannot be at all. How indeed can no-
it is Father, but not as a
"
part ; where, what is not negative, thing be to any thing a cause of being?
instead of being an explanation, is but but all that is, takes its being from One
a recurrence to the original words of who only is, and was, who also said, I '
Scripture, of which €| oixrlas itself is am that I am.' " Demonstr. Ev. iv. 1.
the explanation ;
a curious inversion. Again, speaking of our Lord, "He who
Indeed it is very doubtful whether he was from nothing would not truly be
admitted the f | oiiaias at all. He says, Son of God, as neither is any other of
that the Son is not like the radiance of things generate." Eccl. Theol. i. 9. tin.
light so far as this, that the radiance
f
Eusebius distinctly asserts, Dem.
is an inseparable accident of substance, Ev. iv. 2. that our Lord is a creature.
whereas the Son is by the Father's will, " This " did He
offspring," he says,
Kara yvuifx7]v koI Trpoaipeaiv, Demostr. first produce Himself from Himself as
Ev. iv. 3. And though he insists on our a foundation of those things which
Lord being alone, 4k 0iov,yet he means shovild succeed, the perfect handy-
in the sense which Athan. refutes, work, Sr^fxtovpyriiJia, of the Perfect, and
supr. § 7 [pp. 12, 13]. viz. that He the wise structure, a.px^'^fKT6vT)p.a, of
alone was created immediately from the Wise," &c. Accordingly his avowal
God, vid. next note f. It is true that in the text is but the ordinary Arian
he plainly condemns with the Nicene " an
evasion of offspring, not as the
" It is not without
Creed the e^ ovk ovtwv of the Arians, offsprings." E.g.
" out of
nothing," but an evasion was peril to say recklessly that the Son is
at hand here also ; for he not only generate out of nothing similarly to
" as the other generates." Dem. Ev. v. 1.
adds, according to Arian custom,
others," (vid. note following,) but he vid. also Eccl. Theol. i. 9. iii. 2. And
has a theory that no being whatever he considers our Lord the only Son by
is out of nothing, for non-existence a divine provision similar to that by
cannot be the cause of existence. God, which there is only one sun in the fir-
he says, " proposed His own wUl and mament, as a centre of light and heat.
to the people of his Diocese. 63
wliich is too high for the level of any work ^, and which Ai
IPPEN-
the Divine oracles teach to have been generated from the °'^-
^'' ^^^
Father s, the mode of generation being inscrutable and in-
calculable to every generated nature.
7. And so too on examination there are grounds for
saying, § 7.
that the Son is "one in substance" with the Father; not in
the way of bodies, nor like mortal beings, for He is not such
"
by division of substance, or by severance", no nor by any f «'r'
beget, through Him and in Him giv- the Holy Spirit a third substance,
ing subsistence to the operative words ibid. 15. p. 325. This it was that made
(ideas or causes) of things which were the Latins so suspicious of three hy-
to be, and casting in Him the seeds of postases, because the Semi-arians, as
the constitution and governance of the well as they, understood vTv6(Tra(ns to
universe ; . . Therefore the Father
. mean substance. Eusebius in like
being one, it behoved the Son to be manner calls our Lord " another God,"
one also ; but should any one object "a second God." Dem. Ev.v.4.p. 226.
that He constituted not more, it is V. fin.
" second Lord." ibid. 3
init. 6.
" second cause." Dem. Ev. v.
fitting for such a one to complain that fin. Prsef.
He constituted not more suns, and vid. also erepov exowo'a t^ kut' ovcriav
moons, and worlds, and ten thousand viroKeijj.eyoi', Dem. Ev. v. 1. p. 215.
other things." Dem. Ev. iv. 5. fin. vid. KaO' eavrhv ovcriio/jifvos. ibid. iv. 3.
also iv. 6. And so eTepos irapa rhv Tarepa. Eccl.
e Eusebius does not say that our Theol. i. 60.
p. 90. and ^coV '5mi/ ^x'^f-
Lord is from the substance of the ibid, and (wv Kal vtpecrrws koX tov
Father, but has a substance from the Trarpbs virapx^^v sktos. ibid. Hence
Father. This is the Semi-arian doc- Athan. insists so much, as in this
trine, which, whether confessing the treatise, on our Lord not being exter-
Son from the substance of the Father nal to the Father. Once admit that
or not, implied that His substance was He is in the Father, and we may call
not the Father's substance, but a the Father, the onli/ God, for He is
second substance. The same doctrine included. And so again as to the In-
is found in the Semi-arians of Ancyia, generate, the term does not exclude
though they seem to have confessed the Son, for He is generate in the In-
" of the substance." And this is one
generate.
'
object of the d/xooiffiov, to hinder the This was the point on which, as we
confession "of the substance" from have partly seen already, the Semi-
implying a second substance, which arians made their principal stand
was not obviated or was even encou- " one in
against the substance,"
riiged by the ojjioiovawv. The Council though they also objected to it as
of Ancyra, quoting the text " As the being of a Sabellian character. E.g.
Father hath life in Himself, so," &c. Euseb. Demonstr. iv. 3. p. 14H. d. p.
" since the life which is in the 149. a, b. V. 1. pp. 213—215. contr.
says,
Father means substance, and the life Marcell. i. 4. p. 20. Eccl. Theol. i. 12.
of the Only-begotten which is begot- p. 73. in laud. Const, p. 525. lU- Fide i,
ten from the Father means substance, ap. Sirmond.tom. i.p. 7. de Fide ii. p.
the word ' so' implies a likeness of 16. and apparently his de Incorporali.
substance to substance." Hier. 73. 10 And so the Semi-arians at Ancyra,
fin. Hence Eusebius does not scruple Epiph. Hjcr. 73. 11. p. 858. a, b. And
to speak of " two substances," and so Mcletius, ibid. p. 878 fin. and Cyril
64 Letter of Eusehius of Ccesarea
ponents. sessed ;
so that the addition of only'
Here agfain Eusebius does not say may belong to the Father alone as
'
by all, that the Son of God was before the generation ac- Appen-
DIX.
cording to the flesh ^ Nay, our most religious Emperor
did at the time prove, in a speech, that He was in being '*
nity,
doxy of Eusebius, leaves out this he- create the worlds. And he acutely and
terodox paragraph altogether. Bull, ingeniously interprets the Arian for-
"
however, Defens. F. N. I'd. 9. n. 3. mula, Before His generation He was
thinks it an interpolation. Athanasius not," to support this view. Another
alludes to the early part of the clause, opportunity will occur ot giving an
supr. p. 7. and ad Syn. § 13. where he ox^inion uponthisquestion meanwhile,
;
says, that Eusebius implied that the the parallel on which the heretical
Arians denied even our Lord's exist- doctrine is supported in the text is
ence before His incarnation. As to answered by many writers, on the
Constantine, he seems to have been ground that Father and Son are words
used on these occasions by the coiu't of nature, but Creator, King, Saviour,
Bishops who wei-e his instructors, are external, or what may be called
and who made him the organ of their accidental to Him. Thus Athanasius
own heresy. Upon the first rise of the observes, that Father actually implies
Arian controversy he addn^ssed a sort Son, but Creator only the power to
of pastoral letter to Alexander and " a
create, as expressing a Zivafxis ;
Arius, telling- them that they were maker is before his works, but he who
disputing- al)out a question of words, says Father, forthwith in Father im-
and recommending them to drop it plies the existence of the Son." Orat.
and live together peaceably. Euseb. iii. § 6 [infra p. 407]. vid. Cyril too,
vit. C. ii. 69. 72. Dial. ii. p. 459. Pseudo-Basil, contr.
™ Eun. iv. 1. fin. On the other hand Ori-
Theog-nis, another of the Nicene
Arians, says the same, according to gen argues the reverse way, that since
viz.
" that God even God is eternally a Father, therefore
Philostorgius ;
before He begat the Son was a Father, eternally Creator also "As one cannot
:
as having the power, Suvoyuis, of be- be father without a son, nor lord witii-
getting." Hist. ii. 15. Though Bull pro- out possession, so neither can (iod be
nounces such doctrine to be heretical, called All-powerful, without subjects
as of course it is, still he considers that of His i)ower ;" Periarcli. i. 2. n. 10.
it expresses what otlierwise ^AivU'A may hence he argued for the eternity of
be orthodox, viz. the doctrine that our matter.
Lord was called the Word from eter-
NOTE on page 61.
NicEN. Bishop Bull has made it a question, whether these words in the
P^^' Nicene Creed mean the same thing, or are to be considered dis-
tinct from eacli other, advocating' himself the latter opinion against
Petavius. The history of the word vTv6(nacn^ is of too intricate a
character to enter upon here ;
but a few words may be in place
in illustration of its sense as it occurs in the Creed, and with
reference to the view taken of it by the great divine, who has
commented on it.
Bishop Bull, as I understood him (Defens. F. N. ii. 9. § 11.),
considers that two distinct ideas are intended by the words ovo-ia
and vTrocTTao-ts, in the clause e^ ere/jas woo-Tacrews rf ovaias ; as if the
Creed condemned those who said that the Son was not from the
Father's substance, and those also who said that He was not from
the Father's hypostasis or subsistence ; as if a man might hold at
least one of the two without holding the other. And in matter of
fact, he does profess to assign two parties of heretics, who denied
this or that proposition respectively.
Petavius, on the other hand (de Trin. iv. 1.), considers that the
word {iTroo-racrts, is but another term for ova-La, and that not two but
one proposition is contained in the clause in question the word ;
pressly asserts, that the Council did mean the two terms to be distinct,
and this when he is answering the Sabellians, who grounded their
assertion that there was but one vTroaTaaLs, on the alleged fact, the
Council had used ovcria and {iTrocrTao-ts indifferently.
Bull refers also to Anastasius, Hodeg. 21. (22. p. 343. ?) who says,
that the Nicene Fathers defined that there are three hypostases or
Persons in the Holy Trinity, Petavius considers that he derived
this from Gelasius of Cyzicus, a writer of no great authority; but.
as the passage occurs in Anastasius, they are the words of Andrew
of Samosata. But what is more important, elsewhere Anastasius
quotes a passage from Amphilochius to something of the same effect.
Note on the ivord Hypostasis in the Nicene Anathema. 67
reach the Arians, and the other the Semi-arians that the Semi- ;
yet it fails to tell us who did deny the It, {iTroo-Tacrews, in a sense
distinct from Vc. ovaLa?.
2. Next,proof that the Semi-arians did hold the i^ inro-
his only
(TTuo-ews as distinct from the e^
oicrtas, lies in the circumstance, that
the three (commonly called) Semi-arian confessions of A.D. 341,
344, 3'}\, known as Mark's of Arethusa, the Macrostiche, and the
first Sirmian, anathematize those who
say that the Son is c^ eVtpas
VTToo-Tao-eoJs kol Ik toS Oeov, not
/^t) anathematizing the e^ erepas oucrtas,
which he infers thence was their own
belief. Another explanation
of this passage will be offered
presently ; meanwhile, it is well to
observe, that Hilary, in speaking of tlie confession of Philippo))olis
which was taken from Mark's, far from suspecting that tlie clause
involved an omission, defends it on the ground of its rrfiiinini>- the
Anathema, de Synod. 35. thus implying that e^ erepas vTroo-Tacrews
Koi fxr] eK toO 6eov was equivalent to i$ crcpas vTroo-racrfais ^ oicrtas.
And it may be added, that Athanasins in like maimer, in his account
of the Nicene Council above translated
(de Uecret. § 20. fin. [supra
p. 36]), when repeating its anathema, drops the i$ {iTroo-raCTew? al-
together, and reads tous 5e Aeyoi'Tas i$ ovk ovtojv, ....>) -n-oLrjfxa, rj
ii erepas owtas, tovtovs avaOefxaji^eL k. t. A.
F 2
68 Note on ilie word Hypostasis in the Nicene Anathema,
dict so g-reat a writer, that most of them did not deny it. He says
that it is
" certissimum" that the heretics who wrote the three con-
"
fessions above noticed, that is, the Semi-arians, nunquam fassos,
nunquam fassuros fuisse filium l^ ovaias, h substantia, Patris pro-
genitum." His reason for not offering any proof for this naturally
is, thatPetavius, with whom he is in controversy, maintains it
also, and he makes use of Petavius's admission against himself.
Now it may seem bold in a writer of this day to differ not only with
Bull but with Petavius but the reason for doing so is simple
;
it ;
towards enemies .... for, as confessing that the Son is from the
substance of the Father and not of other subsistence, Ik riys orcrcas rov
Trarpos eu'at, koX /x?) they are not lar
ef erepas VTTocrTao-cws rov vlov, . . .
wishes] rov Trarpos and that, ive.pye.La. yevvyp-LKrj, which was one of the
divine evipyeiai, as creation,
rj KnanKi-j,
was another. Yet surely
Epiphanius not bear out this representation better than
does
Athanasius ; since the Semi-arians, whose words he reports, speaks
of " vlov ofjiOLov KOi Kar' ovaiav Ik rov irarpos, p. 825 b, <I)S 17 aocfiia
rov ao(f>ov vlos, ovata ovcrtas, p. 853 c, kut' ovatav vlov toC ©eou
Note on the word Hypostasis in the Nicene Anathema. 69
jininnovation upon the " veterem vocal)uli usum" beg-an at the date Note.
of the f'ouncil of Sardica, thoiigli Socrates mentions the dispute as
existing at Alexandria before the Nicene Council, Hist. iii. 4. 5. while
the supposititious confession of Sardica professes to have received
the doctrine of the one hypostasis by tradition as Catholic.
Nor is the use of the word in earlier times inconsistent with
these testimonies ; though it occurs so seldom, in spite of its beings
a word of S. Paul, that testimony is our principal evidence.
" 'J'hose
Socrates's remarks deserve to be quoted ; among the
Greeks who have treated of the Greek philosophy, have defined
substance, oiaia, in many ways, but they had made no mention at all
of hypostasis. Irenseus the Granimarian, in his alphabetical Atticist,
even calls the term barbarous ; because it is not used by any of the
ancients, and if
any where found, it does not mean what it is now
taken for. Thus in the Piiwnix of Sophocles it means an am- '
bush ;' but in Menaiider, ' preserves,' as if one were to call the
'
wine-lees in a cask hypostasis.' However it must be observed,
that, in spite of the old philosophers being silent about the term,
the more modern continually use it for substance, owtas." Hist,
iii. 7. The word principally occurs in Origen among Ante-Nicene
writers, and he, it must be confessed, uses it, as far as the context
decides its sense, to mean subsistence or person. In other words, it
was the word of a certain school in the Church, which afterwards
was accepted by the Church ; but this proves nothing about
the sense in which it was used at Nictiea. The three Hyj)o-
stases are spoken of by Origen, his pupil Dionysius, as afterwards
cular terms which now belong to them are most uniformly of a later
date. Ideas were brought out, but technical phrases did not obtiiin.
Not that these phrases did not exist, but either not as technical, or
in use in a particular School or Cluucli, or with a particular writer, or
as a-Tra^ Aeyo'/xeva, as words discussed, nay resisted, perhaps used by
some local Council, and then at length accepted generally from their
72 Note on the xvord Hijijostasis iniUe Nicene Anathema.
NicEN. obvious propriety. Thus the words of the Schools pass into the
Djef. sernce of the Catholic Church. Instead then of the word vTrdo-rao-ts
" summo
being, as Maran says, received in tbe East consensu,"
from the date of Noetus or at least Sabellius, or of Bull's opinion
"
apud Catholicos Dionysii setate rutuni etjiaitm illud fuisse, tres
esse in divinis hypostases," I would consider that the present use of
the Avord was in the first instance Alexandrian, and that it was
little more than Alexandrian till the middle of the fourth century.
CHAP. I
Reason why two Councils were called. Inconsistency and folly of calling'
any ;
and of the style of the Arian formularies ; occasion of the Nicene
Council ; proceedings at Ariminum ; Letter of the Council to Constantius ;
its decree. Proceedings at Seleucia ; reflections on the conduct of the
Arians,
conversation;
Prefects ^ were circulated far and wide for its convocation.
However, you take that intei'est in the events which have
occurred, that I have determined upon giving you an account
of what I have seen myself' or have ascertained, which may
save you from the suspense attendant on the reports of
others ; and this the more, because there are parties who are
in the practice of misrepresenting what is going on.
2. At Nicasa then, which had been fixed upon, the Council
did not meet, but a second edict was issued, convening the
"^
Ariminum, one of them, Taurus, was been held at Niciea, but the' party of
present, and was the instrument of the Basil did not like a second meeting in
Emperor in overawing the Council. the same place, and Nicomedia was
74 Circumstances of the calling of tJi e Two Counc ils .
been one of them, (where a celebrated was an active Eusebian again at Ari-
Council of Semi-arians actually was minum. At a later date lie
approached
held at the time,) Hil. de Syn. 8. but very nearly to Catholicism.
this was changed for Seleucia. A de- '
Acacius has been mentioned, p. 7.
legacy of Bishops from each Province note J). Eudoxius is said to have been
was summoned to Nicomedia but to ; a puj)il of Liu'ian, Arius's Master,
Nicfea, Bishops whatever, whose
all though the dates scarcely admit it.
health admitted of the journey, ac- Eustatiiius, Catholic Bishop of An-
cording to Sozomen ; but Hilary says, tioch, whom the Eusebians subse-
only one or two from each province of quently deposed, refused to admit him
OauJ were summoned to Ariniinum ;
into orders. Afterwards he was made
he himself v^'as at Seleucia, under Bishop of Germanicia in Syria, by his
compulsion of the local magistrate, party. He was present at tlie Council
being in exile there for the faith, of Antioch in 341, spoken of infra,
Sulp. Sev. ii. 57. § 22. and carried into the West in
^
Ursacius, Bishop of Singidon, and 345, the fifth Confession, called the
Valensi Bishop of Mursa, are generally Long, /jiaKpSarixos. infr. § '26. He
mentioned together. They were pupils afterwards passed in succession to the
of Arius and as such are called young
;
sees of Antioch (vid. supr. p. 1. note
by Athan. ad Ep. JEc;. 7. by Hilary ad a.), and Constantinople, and baptized
Const, i. 5. (imperitis et improbis duo- the Emperor Valens into the Ariau
bus adolescentibus,) and by the Coun- profession.
cil of Sardica, ap. Hilar. Fiagni. ii. 12. s
Patrophilus was one of the ori-
They first appear at the Council of ginal Arian party, and took share in
Tyre, A.D. 335. The Council of Sar- all their principal acts, but there is
dica deposed them ;
in 349, they pub- nothing very distinctive in his history.
able to put into the sliade the Nicene Council, and prevail c:hap.
and by His own mouth in the Gospels, Whoso shall offend Matt. 18,
one of these little ones, it were better for him that a millstone
'
loere hanged about his nech, and that he luere droivned in the
CouNc. depth of the sea, than, as Luke adds, that he should offend one
AND ''
§ 3. the Cathohc Church*, that they should search after faith now,
and should prefix this year's Consulate to their profession of
it ? Yet Ursacius, and Valens, and Grerminius, and their
friends have done, what never took place, never was heard
of among Christians. After putting into writing what it
pleased them to believe, they prefix to it the Consulate, and
the month and the day of the current year""'; thereby to
shew all thinking men, that their faith dates, not from of old,
but now, from the reign of Constantius^ for whatever they
;
we now intend ? who, when the vile the Apostles." Tertull. de Pnescr. 37.
Arian heresy began, but at once, on Tardily for me hath this time of day
hearing its teachers, was startled, as if put forth these, in my judgment, most
they taught strange things?" Orat. ii. impious doctors. Full late hath that
§ 34 [infra p. 328] And Hilary with . faith of mine, which Thou hast in-
" I call the God of
the same sense, structed, encountered these Masters.
heaven and earth to witness, that, be- Before these names were heard of, I
fore 1 had heard either terra, I always thus believed in Thee, I thus was new
felt concerning the two words that by born by Thee, and thenceforth I thus
'
one in substance ought to be under-
'
am Thine." Hil. de Trin. vi. 21 What .
'
stood like in substance,' that is, that heresy hath ever burst forth, but un-
'
nothing can belike in nature, but Him der the name of some certain men, in
That which is of the same nature. Re- some certain place, and at some cer-
g'enerated long since, and for a while tain time? Who ever set up any heresy,
a Bishop, yet I never heard the Nicene who first divided not himself from the
Creed till 1 was in exile, but Gospels consent of the universality and anti-
intimated to me the " Vin-
and Apostles quity of the Catholic Church ?
cent Lir. Commonit. 24. " I will tell
'
meaning of one
'
in substance and
'like in substance.'" de Syn. 91. vid. thee my mind briefly and plainly, that
also ad Const, ii. 7. thou shouldest remain in that Church
" Faith is made a
''
thing of dates which, being founded by the Apos-
rather than Gospels, while it is written tles, endures even to this day. When
down by years, and is not measured thou hearest that those who are called
by the confession of baptism." ad Christ's, are named, not after Jesus
" We
Const, ii. 4. determine yearly Christ, but after some one, say Mar-
and monthly creeds concerning God, cionites, Valentinians, &c. know then
we repent of our determinations we ;
it is not Christ's Church, but the
syna-
defend those who repent, we anathe- gogue of Antichrist. For by the very
matize those whom we have defend- fact that they are formed afterwards,
ed; we condemn our own doings in they shew that they are those who the
those of others, or others in us, and Apostle foretold should come." Jerom.
" If the Church
gnawing each other, we are well nigh in Lucif. 27. was
devoured one of another." ibid. 5. not . .whence hath Donatus appear-
.
1
"Who are you? whence and when ed? from what soil has he spnuig? out
came ye ? what do ye on my property of what sea hath he emerged ? from
being none of mine? by what right, O what heaven hath he fallen ?" August.
Marcion, cuttest thou my wood ? by de Bapt. cpntr. Don. iii. 3.
No authority for it
from the 8criijture. 77
" Athan.
says, that after Eusebius had heresy," ^c. § 52. [Hist, tracts p. 266
taken up the patronage of the heresy, O.T.] Again, "In what then is he
he made no progress till he had gained behind Antichrist ? what more will he
the Court. Hist. Arian. 6(). shewing do when he comes? or rather, on his
that it was an act of external power by coming he not find the way by
will
which Arianism grew, not an inward [Constantius] prepared for him unto
movement in the Church, which indeed his deceiving without elfort? for he too
loudly protested against the Emperor's isto claim the judgments for the court
" If instead of the Churches, and of these
proceeding. Bishops are tojudge,"
" what has the he become head."
he says shortly before, is to § 76. [ib. p.
Emperor to do with this matter? if the 287.] And
so Hosius to Constantius,
Emperor is to threaten, wliat need of "Cease, charge thee,
I and remember
men styled Bishops? wherein the world that thou art a mortal man. Fear the
was such a thing heard of? wliere had day of judgment ; keep thyself clear
the Church's judgment its force from against it. Interfere not with things
the Emperor, or his sentence was at ecclesiastical, nor be the man to charge
allrecognised? many Councils have us in a matter of the kind ; rather learn
been before this, many judgments of them thyself from us. (lod has put
the Church, but neither the Fatliers into thy hand the kingdom ; to us
ever argued with the Emperor about He hath intrusted the things of the
them, nor the Emperor meddled with ('hurch and as he who is traitorous
;
the concerns of the Church. Paul the to thy rule speaks against God who
Apostle had friends of Ca'sar's house- has thus ordained, so fear thou, lest
hold, aiul in his Epistle he saluted the drawing to thyself the things of the
Philippians in their name, but he took Church, thou tallest beneath a great
them not to him as partners in his accusation." Apud Athan. ibid. 44
judgments. But now a new specta- [ib. p. 258] . vid. infr. p. iiO, note p.
cle, and this the discoverv of the Arian
78 Difference hetween deci'ee offaith and rule ofdisdpline.
had not made their essay as touching " the Catholic," for
they did not write, "Thus we believe," but "the Catholic
Faith was published."
5,4. 6. The boldness then of their design shews how little they
understand the subject; while the novelty of their phrase
befits their heresy. For thus they shew, when it was they
began their own faith, and that from that same time present
where celebrated on one day, and that the heresy which was ^y^g '^
faith was noua^ht, nougflit was the bap- tyred, and fruitlessly have such and so
tism of so many thousand thousand, great rulers ruled the people." Greg.
so many works of faith performed, Naz. ad Ciedon. Ep. 102. p. 97.
p This seems to have been an inno-
so manyvirtues, so many ^ifts dis-
played, so many priesthoods, so many vation in these countries of about fifty
ministries exercised, nay, so many mar- years old, or from about the year 276.
tyrdoms crowned." Tertul). Pnescr. It is remarkable, that the Quartodeci-
29.
"
Profane novelties,' which if we
'
man custom had come to an end in
receive, of necessity the faith of our Proconsular Asia, where it had existed
blessed ancestors, either all or a great from S. John's time, before it began
part of it must be overthrown ; the in Syria. Tillemont refers the change
faithful people of all ages and times, to Anatolius of Laodicea ;
the writer
all holy saints, all the chaste, all the of this note has attempted in a former
continent, all the virgins, all the work to prove Paul of Samosata the
Clergy, the Deacons, the Priests, so author of it.
many thousands of confessors, so great TTpSSpofios, praecursor, is almost a
J
armies of martyrs, so many famous received word for the predicted apos-
populous cities and commonwealths, tasy or apostate ( vid. note on S. Cyril's
so many islands, provinces, kings, Cat. XV. 9. also infr. note p.), but the
tribes, kingdoms, nations, to conclude, distinction was not always carefully
almost now the whole world, incor- drawn between the ajiostate and the
porated by the Catholic Faith to Christ Antichrist. Constantius is called Anti-
their head, must needs be said, so christ by Athan. Hist. Arian. 67. his
many hundred years, t() have been ig- acts are the irpooifjuov koI -KapaaK^v^
norant, to have erred, to have blas- of Antichrist. Hist. Arian. 70 fin. 71.
phemed, to have believed they knew and 80. Constantius is theiraage, ("lkwv,
not what." A'inc. Conim. 24. " O the of Antichrist. 74. and 80. and shews
extravagance the wisdom, hidden
! the likeness, ofxoioifxa, of tlu^ maligntiy
after Christ's coming, they announce of Antichrist. 7.'). vid. also 77.Trp65ponos
" Let Christ be
to us to-day, which is a thing to draw 77. expected, for Anti-
tears. For if the faith began thirty christ is in possession." Hilar, contr.
years since, while near four hundred Const, Constantius, Antichrist,
init.
are past since Christ was manifested, ibid. 5.Speaking of Auxenthis, the
nought hath been our gospel that Arian Bishop of Milan, he says, "Of
long while, and nought our faith, one thing I warn you, beware of Anti-
atui fruitlessly have martyrs been mar- christ it is ill that a love of walls has
;
80 Councils declare the ancient Apostolical faith.
8. But the Councils whicli they have set in motion, what Chap.
colourable pretext have they^? If any new heresy has risen —
since the Arian, let them tell us the positions which it has , \ ^'
devised, and who are its inventors ? and in their own for- Mg. lo.
mula, let them anathematize the heresies antecedent to this
Council of theirs, among which is the Arian, as the Nicene
Fathers did, that it may be made appear that they too have
some cogent reason for saying what is novel". But if no such f vid.
event has happened, and they have it not to shew, but rather ^^J^'^^ 5
they themselves are uttering heresies, as holding Arius's ir- and c.
religion, and are exposed day by day, and day by day shift
their ground*, what need is there of Councils, when the Nicene
is sufficient, as against the Arian heresy, so against the rest,
which it has condemned one and all by means of the sound
faith For even the notorious Aetius, who was surnamed
?
^
godless ^, vaunts not of the discovering of any mania of his vid. p,
•"•**•
own, but under stress of weather has been wrecked upon
Arianism, himself and the persons whom he has beguiled.
Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they
have demanded Councils for the faith^s-sake ; for divine
Scripture is sufficient above all things but if a Council be ;
»
vid. de Deer.and § 4. and p. 2.
init. sometimes with rash presumption, they
note c. Wehave abundant in-
shall allow such things as seem uncertain, at
stances of the Arian changes as this another time of pusillanimity they are
Treatise proceeds. " It in fear even about those
happens to things which
thee," says S. Hilary to Constantius, are certain doubtful which way to
;
" as to unskilful
builders, always to be take, which way to return, what to
dissatisfied with what thou hast done ; desire, what to avoid, what to hold,
thou art ever destroying what thou what to let go, &c." Mncent. Comni.
art ever building." contr. Constant. 23. 20. " Hewrites," says Athan. of Con-
"O miserable state with what seas
I
stantius,"and while lie writes repents,
of cares, with what storms, are they and while he repents is exasperated ;
tossed !for now at one time, as the and then he grieves again, and not
wind driveth them, they are carried knowing how to act, he shews how
away headlong in error ; at another bereft the soul is of understanding."
time,comingagainto themselves, they Hist. Arian. 70. [Hist, tracts p. 282
are beaten back like
contrary waves ; O.T.] vid. also ad Ep. lEg. 6.
a
82 Council of Arlminvm.
whole assembly was discussing the matter from the Divine Chap.
through whom the ages were disposed and all things were made ;
and Him begotten as the Oidy-begotten, Only from the Only
Fatlier, God from God, like to the Father who begat Him, accord- '6noiov
ing to the Scriptures whose generation no one knoweth save the
;
Father alone who begat Him. We know that He, the Only-begotten
Son of God, at the Father's bidding came from the heavens for the
a!)olishment of sin, and was born of the Virgin Mary, and conversed
Avitii the
disciples, and fulfilled the economy according to the Father's
will, and was crucified, and died and descended into the parts beneath
the earth, and liad the economy of things there, whom the gate-
keepers of hell saw and shuddered; and He rose from the dead the
third day, and conversed with the disciples, and fulfilled the economy,
and when the forty days were full ascended into the heavens, and
sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and is coming in the last day
of the resurrection in the gltry of the Father, to render to every one
according to liis works.
And Holy Ghost, whom the Only-begotten of God Him-
in the
self, Jesus Christ, had promised to send to the race of men, the
" I
Paraclete, as it is written, go to the Father, and I will ask the
Father, and He shall send unto you another Paraclete, even the
Spirit of Truth," He shall take of Mine and shall teach and bring
to your remembrance all things.
was one of those who carried the long the composition of Mark of Arethusa,
Confession into the West, tliough not yet it was written in Latin and ;
CouNC. But whereas the term "substance," has been adopted by the
Arim. Fathers in simplicity, and gives ofifence as being misconceived by the
^^° and is not contained in the Scriptures, it has seemed good
^"^^^^^ people,
to remove it, that it he never in any case used of God again, because
the divine Scriptures no where use it of Father and Son. But
we say that the Son is like the Father in all things, as all the Holy
Scriptures say and teach ^.
§9.
12. When this had been read, the dishonesty of its framers
was soon apparent. For on the Bishops proposing that
the Arian heresy should be anathematized together with the
other heresies ^, and all assenting, Ursacius and Valens and
their friends refused ; till in the event the Fathers con-
demned them, on the ground that their confession had been
anticipated them once for all, and done all that was need-
ful for the Catholic Church ^'^ However, even then, in
"
This clause shews the presence and then they held Councils to ex-
nasius ;
the confession is raised towards the received terms of theology, and there-
end by the introduction of tlie phrase, by the Nicene Creed, professing to
" like in all adhere to Scripture. At Seleucia, as
things," Kara Traj/Tao;uoioi',
which was added by Constantius him- described infra, they openly attacked
self, Epiph. Hfer. 73. 22. and which
in the Creed. But they did not dare
the minds of the more orthodox in- avow the Arian heresy the first step ;
"
eluded substance," vid. S. Cyril, then on the part of the Catholics was
Catech. iv. 7. xi. 18. a sense, however, to demand of them a condemnation of
which is contradictory to what goes it. The Anomojans perplexed the
before. It is impossible to go into Eusebians by letting out the secret of
this subject without being involved their real Arianism.
"
in historical difficulties, which there It need scarcely be said, that the
would be no room for discussing. great object of the Arians was to ob-
The Eusebian party began after tain a consideration of the doctrine
•>
12. From his way of stating the mat- somewhat of that meaning even here,
ter, Sozomen seems to have himself
86 Letter of the Council of Ariminum.
your wisdom also might know, that ])eace would not be accom-
plished by the removal of those decrees, as the aforesaid Valens
and Ursacius, Germinius and Caius, engaged. On the contrary,
troubles have in consequence been excited in all regions and the
Roman Church.
On this account we ask your clemency to regard and hear all
our legates with favourable ears and a serene countenance, and
'- —
forefatliers, who, as we trust, were prudent men, and acted not
without the Holy Spirit of God because by these novelties not
;
only are faithful nations troubled, but the infidels also are deterred
from believing. We pray also that you would give orders that so
many Jiishops, who are detained at Ariminum, among whom are
numbers who are broken with age and poverty, may return to their
own country, lest tlie members of their Churches suffer, as being
deprived of their Bishops. This, however, we ask with earnestness,
that nothing be innovated, nothing withdrawn ; but that all remain
incorrupt which has continued in the times of the Father of your
sacred piety and in your own religious days ; and that your holy
prudence will not permit us to be harassed, and torn from our sees ;
but that the Bishops may in quiet give themselves always to the
prayers, which tliey do always offer for your own welfare and for
your reign, and for peace, which may the Divinity bestow on you,
according to your merits, profound and perj)etual But our legates !
nition" of the Council, in which it pro- rem, a nniltis Sanctis Scripturis in-
fesses its adherence to the Creed of sinuatam mentihus nostris, obtinere
Nicfca, and in opposition to the Sir- debere sui firmitatem." Fragm. vii. .'}.
AND accord both put into writing what they decided upon, and
Seleu. deposed the Arians''. Meanwhile the transactions in Seleucia
§ 12. the Rugged were as follows it was in the month called by
:
just heard. He also seems to have in- The Eusebian or Couit party are
'
serted into his work, § 30 and 31 upon here called Acacian, and were Anomoe-
,
the receipt of the news of the mission ans and Semi-ai"ians alternately, or
of Valens to Constantinople, a mission more properly as they may be called
which ended in the submission of the Homcean or Scriptural ; for Arians,
Catholic delegacy. Upon this return- Semi-arians, and Anomoeans, all used
ing to Ariminum with the delegates theological terms as well as the Catho-
and the Arian creed they had signed lics. The Semi-arians numbered about
(vid. infr. § 30.), Valens, partly by 100, the remaining dozen might be the
menaces and partly by sophistry, suc- Egyptian Bishops who were zealous
ceeded in procuring the subscriptions supporters of the Catholic cause.
of the CouncU also to the same for- However, there were besides a few
mula. Anomoeans or Arians, as Athan.
Gorpiffius was the first month of calls them, with whom the Acacians
'
TrpOTTl- and Acacius, who sacrifice " the honour due to their own
VOV(Tl.
infr. §
16. fin. p
Up to the year 356, Athanasius shazzar," "Saul," "Antichrist." The
had treated Constantius as a member passage at the end of the Apol. contr.
of the Church but at that date the
; Arian. [Hist, tracts, p. 123 O.T.] in
Eusebian or Court party abandoned which he speaks of the " much violence
the Semi-arians for the Anoniceans, and tyrannical power of Constantius,"
George of Cappadocia was sent as is an addition of Athan.'s at a later
supr. p. 89. note m. Hence they are fxaiyriTai. Epiphanius speaks of the
a(r€$eTs,xp^f'^ofxd.xot.,nni\ governed i)y eV/uaz/Tjs SiSaaicaXia of the Noetians,
KaKovoia and KaKocppoavvi). Again So- User. 57- 2. Nazianzen contrasts the
crates speaks of it as a flame wliich ra- sickness, vSiros, of Sabeilius with the
vaged, (TTiviixiTo, provinces and cities. madiu'ss of Arius, Orat. 20. 5 but
;
i.6. AndAlexander cries out,2) auotriov Athan. says, juaiVerai /x6f "'Apeios, ^lai-
TV(pov Ka) afierpov fxavlas. Theod. Hist. verai 5f 2a/3eAAios, Orat. iv. 25 [infra
i.3. p. 741. vid. also pp. 735, 6, 747. p.543j: But this note might be pro-
And we read much of tiieir eager spirit longed indefinitely.
92 Impiety of the Arians towm-ds the Fathers.
COUNC own way yet he did not contradict the CounciPs terms,
"^j
Arim.
AND but even charged it upon the Arians, that, their position
Seleu. _that the Son was not before His generation, was not even
consistent with His being before Mary. What then will
they proceed to teach the people who are under their
? that the Fathers erred ? and how are
teaching they them-
selves to be trusted by those, whom they teach to disobey
their Teachers ? and with what faces too will they look
irpoTn-
de
language, as I said before, is consistent in those who barter
vovtri, ^
Deer.
§4. their Fathers' fame and their own salvation for Arianism,
Prov. and fear not the words of the divine proverb. There is a
30, 11.
generation that curseth their father, and the threat lying in
the Law against such.
17. They then, from zeal for the heresy, are of this ob-
stinate you, however, be not troubled at it, nor
temper ;
take their audacity for truth. For they dissent from each
other, and, whereas they have revolted from their Fathers,
are not of one and the same mind, but float about with
various and discordant changes. And, as quarrelling with
f
iis 7)Qf\ii](Ttv. vid. also de Deer. § 3. us 7iQiKT](Tav. ad Ep. JEg. 5. -
Their Variations. 93
tlie Council of Nicaea, they have held many Councils them- Chap.
selves, and have published a faith in each of them, and have —
stood to none^j nay, they will never do otherwise, for per- ad Ep.
i
versely seeking, they will never find that Wisdom which '^^'^'
they hate. I have accordingly subjoined portions both of tracts,
Arius's writings and of whatever else I could collect, of ^' j, ?
their publications in different Councils; whereby you will
learn to your surprise with what object they stand out
against an Ecumenical
"
Council and their own Fathers ^
supr.
foiu-th, sent to Constans in Gaul fifth, the Macrostiche sent into Italy
; ;
eleventh, at Antioch.
COUNC. Aeius and his friends tliouglit and professed thus " God
1 . :
Arim.
AND made the Son out of nothing,and called Him His Son;" "The
Seleu. Word of God is one of the creatures •" and " Once He was
not ;^' and " He is alterable capable^ when it is His will, of
;
'^
altering. Accordingly they were expelled from the Church
§15. by Alexander of blessed memory. However, after his ex-
pulsion, when he was with the Eusebians, he drew up his
ois iv
heresy upon paper, and imitating, as if in festivity ^, no
ea\L
grave writer, but the Egyptian Sotades, in tbe dissolute tone
of his metre % he wi'ites at great length, for instance as
follows :
—
2. Blas23liemies of Arius.
God Himself then, in His own nature, is ineffable by all men.
Equal or like Himself He alone has none, or one in glory.
» —
Again, Orat. i. § 2 5. he calls him should say the Egyptian Sotades, and
the Sotadean Arius and speaks of tlie
; again in Sent. D. tJ. There were two
"dissolute manners," and "tlie effemi- Poets of the name; one a wTiter of the
nate tone," and the "jests" of the Tha- Middle Comedy, Athen. Deipn. vii.
lia ; a poem which ,he say s short ly before, 1 1 but tlie other, who is here spoken
;
respectable Greeks, but among those according to Suidas (in voc), under
only who sing songs over then- wine, the successors of Alexander, Athen.
with noise and revel," [infra p. 182]: xiv. 4. He wrote in Ionic metre,
^id. also de Sent. D. 6. Constantine which was of infamous name from the
also after the "Apes "Apeie, proceeds, subjects to which he and others ap-
eTricrxeTco Se ae r) yovv 'A(J)po5iT7js ofxi- plied it. vid. Suid. ibid. Some read
" Sotadicos " for "
Xia. Epipli. Hter. 69. I) fin. Socrates Socraticos," Juv.
too says that " the character of the Satir. ii. 10. vid. also Martial Ep. ii. 86.
book was gross and cUssolute." Hist, The characteristic of the metre was
i. 9. The Arian Philostorgius tells us the recmTcnce of the same cadence,
that " Arius wi-ote songs for the sea which virtually destroyed the division
and for the mill and for the road, and into verses, Tm-neb. in Quinct. i. 8.
then set them to suitable music," Hist. and thus gave the composition that lax
ii. 2. It is remarkable that Athanasius and slovenly air to which Athanasiu'
Arius's Thalia. 95
invisible.
One more glorious than the other in their glories unto immensity.
Foreign from the Son in substance is the Father, for He is
Unoriginate.
alludes. Horace's Ode, " Miseranmi seems to have conveyed to their
est nee amori, &c." is a specimen of minds and more especially in a case
;
this metre, and some have called it So- where the metre Arius employed had
tadic ; but Bentley shews in loc. that obtained so shocking a reputation, and
Sotades wrote in the Ionic a majore, was associated in the minds of Chris-
and that liis verse had somewhat more tians with the deeds of darkness, in
of system than found in the Ode of
is the midst of which in those heathen
Horace. AtheniEus implies tliat all times the Church lived and witnessed.
Ionic metres were called Sotadic, or *>
This passage ought to have been
that Sotades wrq^e in various Ionic added to note t, p. 35. supr. as contain-
metres. ^^§;Church adopted the Do- ing a more direct denial of the bfxoov-
ric music, and forbade the Ionic and a-wv; so incorrect is Gibbon's assertion,
Lydian. The name "Thalia" com- that on Eusebius's "ingenuously con-
monlj belonged to convivial songs ; fessing that it was incompatible with
Martial contrasts the "lasciva Thalia" the principles of their theological sys-
with " carmina sanctiora," Epigr. vii. tem, the fortunate opportunity was
17. vid. Thaliarchus, "the master of eagerly embraced by the Bishops," as
the feast," Horat. Od. i. i(. If one were if they were bent at all hazards, and
to attempt to form a judgment on without reference to the real and sub-
the nature of Arius's proceeding, it stantial agreement or disagreement
would be this that he attempted to
;
of themselves and the Arians, to find
popularize his heresy by introducing some word which might accidentally
it into the common employments and serve to exclude the latter from com-
recreations of life, and having no reve- munion.
rence, he fell into the error of modern Tliat is. Wisdom, or the Son, is
•^
religionists, who, with a better creed, but the di.sciplt' of Him wlio is Wise,
sing spiritual songs at table, and use and not the tdtriliuti- by wliicli He is
in their chapels glees and opera airs. Wise, whicli is what the Sabellians
This would be more offensive of old said, vid. Orat. iv. § 2. and what Arius
even than now, in proportion to the imputed to the Church.
keener sensibilities of the South and ''
CouNc. Understand that the One was ; but the Two was not, before it was
^^^^'
in existence.
AND
Seleu. It follows at once that, though the Son was not, the Father was God,
Hence He existed at the will of the
the Son, not being, (for
Father,)
IsGod Only-begotten, and He is alien from either.
Wisdom existed as Wisdom by the will of the Wise God.
Hence He is conceived in numberless conceptions ^.
^
iirivoiais, that is, our Lord's titles self, what words he dares to use in
arehut names,ov figures, not properly sophistry concerning God; they run
belonging to Him but only existing in thus '
:
—
God knows not of His sub-
our minds. stance more than we do ; nor is it
'
Kara KardAv^Lv, that is, there is known to Him more, to us less ; but
nothing comprehensible in the Father whatsoever we may know of it, that
for the Son to know and declare. On He too knows and what again He,
;
the other hand the doctrine of the Ano- that you will find without any distinc-
moeans,wlio in most points agreed with tion in us.'" Hist. iv. 7.
Arius, was, that all men could know e Alexander is also so called, Theod.
taught that the offspring was a portion of the Father, one in sub-
stance ; or as Sabellius, dividing the One, speaks of a Son-and-
'
Ep. 57, 2. John of Jerusalem, Hier. notion of the divine substance, con-
contr. Joan. 4. Cyprian of Carthage, sidered tliat it was di\'isible, and tliat a
Ep. ap. Cypr. 31. Augustine of Hippo, portion of it was absorbed by the power
Hier. Ep. 141 init. Lupus, Pragmatius, of darlvness, vid. Appendix to Transla-
Leontius, Theoplastus, Eutropius, &c. tion of S. Aug-ustine's Confessions, ii.
aere eollatitio, to the honour and glory lus, Cyr. Hier. Catech. xv. 9. also iv.
of the Father, ex omnium defloratione 8. xi. 16. Epiph. Haer. 73. 11 fin.: to
constructum," contr. Valent. 12. Ac- Sabellians, Athan. Expos. Fid. 2. and 7
cordingly Origen protests against the Can. Constant, and Greg. Nyssen.
notion of 7rpo/3oArj, Periarch. iv, p. 190. contr. Eun. xii. p. 733: to certain
and Athanasius Expos. § 1. The Arian heretics, Cyril. Alex, in Joann. p. 243.
Asterius too considers irpo^oKrj to in- [p. 282 O.T.J to Pi-axeas and Mon-
:
troduce the notion of Te/cro7oyia, Euseb. tanus, Mar. Merc. p. 128: to Sabellius,
contr. Marc. i. 4. p. 20. vid. also Epiph. Caesar. Dial. i. p. 550: to Noetus,
Haer. 72. 7. Yet Eusebius uses the Damasc. Hier. 57.
word irpo&dWfffBat. Eccles. Theol. i. '
Hieracas was a Manichaean. He
8. On the other hand Tertullian uses compared the Two Divine Persons to
it with a
protest against the A'alen- the two lights of one lamp, where the
tinian sense. Justin has i:po^\r\Q\vyiv- oil is common and the flame double,
vtifia, Tryph. 62. [p. 150 O.T.] And thusimplying asubstance distinct from
Nazianzen calls the Almighty Father Father and Son, or to a flame divided
Trpo^o\(vs of the Holy Spirit. ()rat.29. into two by (for instance) the papyi'us
2. Arius introduces the word here as which was commonly used instead of
an ar^Hinentum ad invidiam. Hil. de a wick. vid. Hilar, de Trin. vi. 12.
"'
Trin. vi. 9. Bull considers that the doctrine
98 Arius's letter to Alexander.
COUNC. Pope, in the midst of the Church and in Session hast often con-
Arim. demned but, as we say, at the will of God, created before times
;
AND and before ages, and gaining life and being from the Father, who
Seleu.
gave subsistence to His glories together with Him. For the Father
did not, in giving to Him the inheritance of all things, deprive Him-
self,of what He has ingenerately in Himself; for He is the Fountain
of all things.
Thus there are Three Subsistences. And God, being the cause
of all things, is Unoriginate and altogether Sole, but the Son being
generated apart from time by the Father, and being created and
founded before ages, was not before His generation, but being
generated apart from time before all things, alone was made to
subsist by the Father. For He is not eternal or co-eternal or co-
ingenerate with the Father, nor has He His being together with the
Father, as some speak of relations ^, introducing two ingenerate
origins, but God is before all things as being a One and an
Origin of all. Wherefore also He is before the Son ; as we have
learned also from thy preaching in the midst of the Church. So
far then as from God He has being, and glories, and life, and all
things are delivered unto Him, in such sense is God His origin.
Rom. 11, For He is above Him, as being His God and before Him. But
36. if the terms
J^rom Him, and Jrom the tvomb, and / came forth from
Ps.110,3.
John the Father, and I am come ', be understood by some to mean as if a
16,
28. part of Him, one in substance, or as an issue, then the Father is
according to them compounded and divisible and alterable and
'
7IK(i)
and so material, and, as far as their belief goes, has the circumstances of a
Chrys.
Horn. 3. body, who is the Incorporeal God.
Hebr. This is a part of what the Arians cast out from their
init.
heretical hearts.
Epiph.
Hfer. 73. 4. And
before the Nicene Council took place^ similar state-
31. and
of such Fathers is here spoken of as the Word Himself became the Son
36.
held that our Lord's avyKaTa^aa-is to when He was made man." It makes it
§17. create the world was a -yeVi-Tio-is, and cer- more likely that Marcellus is meant,
tainly such language as that of Hippol. that Asterius seems to have written
contr. Noet. § 15. favours the supposi- against him before the Nicene Council,
tion. But one class of the Sabellians and that Arius in other of his writings
may more probably be intended, who borrowed from Asterius. vid. de De-
held that the Word became the Son cret. § 8.
° Eusebius's
on His incarnation, such as Marcellus, letter to Euphration,
vid. Euseb. Eccles. Theol. i. 1. contr. which is mentioned j ust after, expresses
Marc. ii. 3. vid. also Eccles. Theol. this more distinctly "If they co-—
ii.9.p. 114b. jUTjR' &K\oTe &\\t}v /c.t.A. exist, how shall the Father be Father
Also the Macrostich says, " We
ana- and the Son Son? or how the One
thematize those who call Him the first, the Other second? and the One
mere Word of God, not allowing Him ingenerate and the other generate ?"
to be Christ and Son of God before Acta Cone. 7. p. 301. The phrase to.
all ages, but from the time He took on !rp6s ri Bull well explains to refer to
Him our flesh ; such are the followers the Catholic truth that the Father or
of Marcellus and Photinus, &c." infra, Son being named, the Other is therein
§ 26 [pp. 113, 114]. Again, Athan- impUed without naming. Defens. F.
asius, Orat. iv. 15 [infra p. 531] says ,
N. iii. 9. § 4. Hence Arius, in his Letter
that, of those who divide the Word to Eusebius, complains that Alexander
from the Son, some called oiu- Lord's says, aei o dehs, ael 6 vl6s' oifxa Trarr]p,
manhood the Son, some the two Na- a/j-a vi6s. Theod. Hist. i. 4.
tures together, and some said "that
Avian statements of the tivo Eiisehii, Athanasius and George. 99
may adopt them for it is plain to any one, that what has
;
been made was not before its generation but what came to ;
to Asterius," says Eusebius, " now to and Theodotus. Nazarbi is more com-
the great Eusebius," [of Nicomedia,] nionly called Anazarbus, and is in
" and tlien he turns
upon that man of Cilicia.
p This is
God, tliat indeed tlirice blessed person quoted, among other pas-
Paulinns, [of Tyre.] Then he goes tp sagesfrom Eusebius, in the 7th General
war with Origen. ..Next he marches
. Council, Act. 6. p. 409. [t. 8. 1148 e
out against Narcissus, and pursues the ed. Col.] "The Son Himself is God,
other Eusebius," himself. "In a word, but not Very God."
he counts for nothing all the Ecclesias-
H 2
100 Avian statements of Asterius.
CouNc. from God, and it is plain that all things are made of nothing",
^^^' though the Son too is a creature and one of things made,
Selbp. still He may be said to be from God in that sense in which
all things are said to be from God." From him then the
Arians learned to pretend to the phrase from God, and to
use it indeed, but not in a good meaning. And George
himself was deposed by Alexander for certain reasons, and
among them for manifest irreligion ; for he was himself a
presbyter, as has been said before.
§ 18. 5. On the whole then such were their statements,as if they
all were and rivalry with each other, which should
in dispute
make the heresy more irreligious, and display it in a more
naked form. And as for their letters I have them not at hand,
to dispatch them to you else I would have sent you copies ;
;
but, if the Lord will, this too I will do, when I get possession
of them. And one Asterius 1 from Cappadocia, a many-headed
taining them, ap. Epiph. Haer. 72. 6. "not that the Father was not able, did
and doubtless both he (to judge by his He beget the Son; but because those
fragments) and Eusebius write with things which were made were not able
much less of revolting impiety than to sustain the power of the Ingenerate,
others of their party. Thus in one of therefore speaks He through a Me-
the extracts made in the text he dis- diator. contr. Sabell. i.
p. 9. At the
tinguishes after the manner of the same time if he is so to be considered,
Semi-arians between the yevvrtTiK^ it isan additional proof that the Semi-
and the S-nixiovpyiK^ SwaiuLts. Again, arians of 325 were far less Catholic
the illustration of the Sun in another than those of 359. He seems to be
much resembles Euseb.Dem. iv. 5. So called many-headed with an allusion
does his doctrine, supr. de Deer. § 8. to the Hydra, and to his activity in the
that the Son was generated to create Arian cause and his fertilityin writing,
other beings, and that, because they He wrote comments on Scripture.
Avian statements of Asterius. 101
might make free with it. The bold man intruded himself Chap.
into forbidden places, and seating himself in the place of : —
Clerks , he used to read publicly this treatise of his, in spite
of the general indignation. The treatise is written at great
length, but portions of it are as follows :
—
" For the Blessed Paul said not that he
preached Christ, His, that
is,God's, 'proper Power' or 'Wisdom,' but without the article,
God's Power and God's Wisdom, preaching that the proper power i Cor. 1,
of God Himself was distinct, which was connatural and co-existent 24.
with Him ingenerately, generative indeed of Christ, creative
of the
whole world which he teaches in his Epistle to the
; concerning
Romans, thus, The invisihle things of Him from the creation o/Rom. 1,
the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things ivhich 20.
are made, even His eternal power and godhead. For as no one
would say that the Godliead there mentioned was Christ, but the
Father Himself, so, as I think. His eternal power is also not the
Only-begotten God, but the Father who begat Him. And he tells
us of another Power and Wisdom of God, namely, that which is
manifested through Christ, and made known through the works
themselves of His Ministry."
And again:
—
"Although His eternal Power and Wisdom, which truth argues
to be Unoriginate and Ingenerate, would appear certainly to be one
and the same, yet many are those powers which are one by one
created by Him, of which Christ is the First-born and Only-
begotten. All however equally depend upon their Possessor, and
all His powers are rightly called His, who has created and uses
them ; for instance, the Prophet says that the locust, which became
a divine punishment of human sin, was called by God Himself,
not only the power of God, but the great power. And the blessed
David too in most of the Psalms, invites, not Angels alone, but Powers
also to praise God. And while he invites them all to the hymn, he
call them
presents before us their multitude, and is not unwilling to
ministers of God, and teaches them to do His will."
6. These bold words against the Saviour did not content § 19.
the sun is one among what is apparent, and it shines upon the
CouNc. whole world according to the command of its Maker, so the Son,
Aeim.
being one of the intellectual natures, also enlightens and shines
AND all that are in the intellectual world."
Seleu. upon
His Power." And again ''If the will of God has pervaded
:
for these they assail the Ancient Council, because its members
did not propound the like, but anathematized the Arian
heresy instead, which they were so eager to recommend. On
this account they put forward, as an advocate of their irre-
»
Artemas or Artemon was one of now be called Unitarianism, or that our
the chiefs of a school of heresy at Lord was a mere man. Artemas seems
Rome at the end of the second cen- to have been more known in the East ;
tury. Theodotus was another, and the at least is more frequently mentioned in
more eminent. They founded separate controversy with the Arians, e. g-. by
sects. Their main tenet is what would Alexander, Theod. Hist. i. 3. p. 739.
Council of Jerusalem. 103
the Lord's Name beinff full of love, and the whole creation Chap.
against that Ecumenical One ^, and are not yet tired *. After
'
p. 49,
CouNc. King of all, and to His Christ, by the zeal of the most religious
Aeim. Constantine, the grace of Christ provided a higher grati-
Emperor
fication, in the conduct of that most religious Emperor himself,
g*^°
•
who, bv letters of his own, banishing from the Church of God
all jealousy, and driving far away all envy, by
means of which,
the members of Christ had been for a long season in dissension,
exhorted us, what was our duty, with open and peaceable mind
to receive Arius and his friends, whom for a while jealousy which
hates virtue had contrived to expel from the Cluu-ch. And the
most religious Emperor bore testimony in their behalf by his letter
to the exactness of their faith, which, after inquiry of them, and
he acknow-
personal communication with them by word of mouth,
ledged, and made known to us, subjoining to his own letters their
orthodox in
teaching whicii we all confessed to be sound
Avriting
>',
For when tliey said tliat they had banished all jealousy, and.
Chap.
after the expulsion of Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, '- —
recommended the reception of Arius and his friends, they
shewed, that their measures against Athanasius himself
then, and before against all the other Bishops who with-
stood them, had for their object their receiving Arius's
party, and introducing the heresy into the Church. But
although they had approved in this Council all Arius's
malignity, and had ordered to receive his party into com-
munion, as they had set the example, yet feeling that even
now they were short of their wishes, they assembled a
Council at Antioch under colour of the so-called Dedi-
^
cation ; and, since they were in general and lasting odium
for their heresy, they publish different letters, some of this
sort, and some of that ; and what they wrote in one letter
was as follows :
—
We —
have not been followers of Arius, how could Bishops, such 'st Con-
as we, follow a Presbyter ? —
nor did we receive any other faith
f^^^'''"
,
beside that which has been handed down from the beginning*. But, Antoch
after taking on ourselves to examine and to
verify his faith, we have A.D. 341.
admitted him rather than followed him ; as you will understand
from our present avowals.
For we have been taught from the first, to believe in one God,
the God of the Universe, the Framer and Preserver of all things
both intellectual and sensible.
And in One Son of God, Only-begotten, existing before all ages,
and being with the Father who begat Him, by whom all things were
made, both visible and innsible, who in the last days according to
^
i.e. the dedication of the Domini- though not as from this Council,
cum Aureum, which liad been ten which took at least some of them from
years in building, vid. the description more ancient sources. It is remark-
of itin Euseb. Vit. Const, iii. 50. This able that S. Hilary calls this Council
Council is one of great importance an assembly of Saints, de Syn. 32. but
in the history, though it was not at- it is his coui-se
throughout to look at
tended by more than 90 Bishops ac- these Councils on their hopeful side,
cording to Ath. infr. or 97 according vid. note t.
to Hilary de Syn. 28. The Eusebians »
The Council might safely appeal
had written to the Roman see against to antiquity, since, with Arius in the
Athan. and eventually called on it Confession noticed supr. note y, they
to summon a Council. Accordingly, did not touch on the point in dispute.
Julius proposed a Council at Rome; The number of their formularies, three
they refused to come, and instead held or four, shews that they had a great
tliis at Antioch.
meeting Thus in a difficulty in taking any view which
certain sense it is a protest of the East woiUd meet the wishes and express
against the Pope's authority. Twenty- the sentiments of one and all. The
five Canons are attributed to this one that follows, which is their first.
Council, which have been received is as meagre as Arius's, quoted note
y.
into the Code of the Catholic Church,
106 Creed of the Dedication at Antioch,
COUNC. the ^ood pleasure of the Father came down, and took flesh of the
Arim. Virgin, and fulfilled all His Father's will and suffered and rose ;
AND and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the riglit hand of the
Select. again,
Father, and conieth again to judge quick and dead, and remaineth
King and God unto all ages.
And we believe also in the Holy Ghost and if it be necessary ;
§30.
image of the Godhead, Substance, WiW, Power, and Glory of the
'I
and that Acacius attributes its lan- it marked the hmit of Semi-arian ap-
taining some of the phrases which in the true sense of a-KapaWaKTov that
the fourth eentmy became badges of the Council adopted the word ofxoov-
Semi-arianism. aiov. 'AirapdWaKTov is accordingly
These strong words and those
"^
used as a familiar word by Athan.
which follow, whether Lucian's ornot, de Deer. supr. § 20. 24. Orat. iii. §
mark the great difference between 36. contr. Gent. 41. 46 fin. Philo-
this confession and the foregoing. It storgius ascribing it to Asterius, and
would seem as if the Eusebians had at Acacius quotes a passage from his
being second Creed of Eusebians, Semi-arian.
107
Father; the first born of every creature, who was in the beginning- Chap.
with God, God the Word, as it is written in the Gospel, and the U.
Word ivas God; by whom all things were made, and in whom all
things consist who in the last days descended from above, and was
;
writings containing it. (vid. supr. note former are not more explicit in them-
q.) Acacius at the same time forcibly selves, or that in a certain true sense
expresses what is meant by tlie word, our Lord may not be called a Mediator
rh €KTVTrov Kol rpaves iK/xayelov rov before He became incarnate, but be-
Qiov TTJs ovaias and S. Alexander
;
cause the Arians, even Eusebius, seem
before liim, Ti]V Kara irdvTa o/xot- to have made His mediatorship con-
6T7\ra avTov e/c (pvcrecas aTro/xa^d/jLevu?. sist essentially in His divine nature,
Theod. Hist. i. 3. (as, in the legend,the whereas this Confession speaks of our
impression of our Lord's face on the Lord as made Mediator when He came
cloth at His crucifixion.) XapaKrr^p, in the flesh. On
the other hand, Eu-
Hebr. i. contains the same idea.
3. sebius, like Philo and the Platonists,
"An image not inanimate, not framed considers Him as made in the begin-
" Eternal Priest of the Fa-
by the hand, nor work of art and ning, the
imagination, (eirij/oias,) but a living ther," Demonst. v. 3. de Laud. C. 3,
" an intermediate divine
image, yea, the very life {avroova-a) ; p. 503 fin.
"
ever preserving theiuivarying(Tb atra- power," 11, p. 525. mediating and
paWaKTov}, not in likeness of fashion, joining generated substance to the
but in its very substance." Basil, contr. Ingenerate," 12, p. 528. vid. infr. pp.
Eunoni. i. 18. The Auctor de Trinitate 115. and 119. notes f. and o.
says, speaking of the word in this very
^
This phrase, which is of a more
" Will in Arian character than any other part of
creed, nothing varying from
will (airapdWaKTos) is the same will ;
the Confession, is justified by S. Hilary
and power nothing varying from power on the ground, that when the Spirit is
is the same power and glory nothing
; mentioned, agreement is the best sym-
bol of unity, de Syn. 32. It is protested
varying from glory is the satne glory."
The Macedonian replies, " Unvarying against in the Sardican Confession.
I say, the same I say not." Dial iii. p. Theod. Hist. ii. 6. p. 846. A similar
993. Athan. de Deer. 1. c. seems to say passage occurs in Origen, contr. Cels.
the same. That is, in the Catholic viii. 12. to which Huet. Origen ii. 2.
sense, the image was not a-rrapdWaKTos, n. 3. compares Novatian. de Trin. 22.
if there was ani/ difference, unless He The Ai'ians insisted on the " oneness
was one with Him of whom He was in agreement" as a fulfilment of such
7(>, note i.
the image, vid. Hil. supra, p. texts as "1 and my Father are one;"
"
This statement perhaps is the most but this subject will come before us in
Catholic in the Creed not that the ;
Orat. iii. § 10. vid. infr. § 48.
108 Creed of Theophronius, at Antiocli,
CotTNC. Holding then this faith, and liolding- it in the presence of God
Arim. and Christ, from beginning- to end, we anathematize every here-
AND tical heterodoxy?. And if any teaches, beside the sound and right
Seleu.
faith of the Scriptures, that time, or season, or age'^, either is or has
been before the generation of the Son, be he anathema. Or if any
1
vid.
one says, that the Son is a creature as one of the creatures \ or an off-
p. 10,
note u. spring as one of the offsprings, or a work as one of the works, and
not the aforesaid articles one after another, as the divine Scriptures
have delivered, or if he teaches or preaches beside what we received,
be he anathema. For all that has been delivered in the divine Scrip-
tures, whether by Prophets or Apostles, do we truly and conscientiously
both believe and follow i.
OTSdof lieli^ve: —
the Father Almighty, the Creator and Maker of
in God
Antioch the Universe, from whom are all things :
A.D. 341, And in His Only-begotten Son, God, Word, Power, and Wisdom,
our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things; who was begotten
from the Father before the ages, perfect God from perfect God^
« The whole of these anathemas are ydous centuries had been the Sabellian
an Ensebian addition. The Council doctrine, which considered the title
anathematizes " every heretical hete- " Word " when
applied to our liord
rodoxy ;" not, as Athanasius observes, to be adequately explained by the or-
supra, § 7. the Arian. dinary sense of the term, as a word
The introduction of these words
*>
spoken by us. vid. on the \6yos
"time," "age," &c. allows them still trpofpopLKhs, inf. p. 113, note z. In con-
" once He
to hold the Arian formula sequence they insisted on His rh re-
was not " for our Lord was, as they
;
which became almost
\etov, perfection,
held, before time, but created.
still synonymous with His personality.
'
This emphatic mention of Scrip- Thus the ApoUinarians, e. g. denied
ture is also virtually an Arian evasion ; that our Lord was perfect man, be-
to hold certain truths,
"
as Scriptm-e cause His person was not human.
has delivered," might either mean be- Athan. contr.Apoll. i. 2. Hence Justin,
cawse and as in fact, or so far as, and Tatian, are earnest in denying that our
admitted of a silent reference to them- Lord was a portion divided fi-ora the
selves as interpreters of Scripture. Divine Substance, oii Kar a.TroTo/xr]y,
^ &c. &c. Just. Tryph. 128. [p. 229 fin.
Nothing is known of Theophronius ;
and being with God in subsistence, and in the last days descended, Chap.
and was born of the Virgin according to the Scriptures, and was H.
made man, and suffered, and rose again from the dead, and ascended
into the heavens, and sat down on the right hand of His Father, and
cometh again with glory and power to judge quick and dead, and
remaineth for ever :
And in the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, the Spirit of truth, which
also God promised by His Prophet to pour out upon His servants,
and the Lord promised to send to His disciples which also He sent,
:
spring of His perfection, and superper- fested One perfect Son of God." contr.
fection." ap. Epiph. Hsr. 72. 7. Te- Noet. 15.
\eios then was a relative word, varying
^ Marcelhis wrote his work
against
with the subject matter, vid. Damase. Asterius in 335, the year of the Arian
F. O. i. 8. p. 138. and when the Arians Council of Jerusalem, which at once
said that our Lord was perfect God, took cognizance of it. and cited Mar-
" cellus to appear before them. The
meant, perfect, in </(«^ sf-wse jw
tliey
—
which He is God" i. e. as a secondary next year a Council held at Constan-
—
divinity. Nay, in one point of view tinople condemned and deposed him,
they would use the term of His divine about the time that Arius came thi-
Nature more freely than the Catholics ther for re-admission into the Church,
sometimes had. For, Hippolytus, e.g. From that time his name is frequently
though of course really holding His introduced into the Arian anathemas,
perfection from eternity as the Son, vid. Macrostich. § 26. By adding those
of His condescension in
" who communicate with him," the
yet speaks
coming upon earth as a kind of com- Eusebians intended to strike at the
pletion of His Sonship, He becoming Roman see, which had acquitted Mar-
thus a Son a second time ; whereas the cellus in a Council held in June of the
Arians holding no real condescension same year.
" The commencement and the origin
or assumption of a really new state,
could not hold that our Tiord was in of this mode of dating are unknown,
any respect essentially other than He It seems to have been introduced be-
had been before the incarnation. "Nor tween A.D. 313 and 315. The Indic-
was the Word," says Hippolytus, tion was a cycle of 15 years, and
' before the flesh and
by Himself,per- began with the month of September.
feet Son, though being perfect Word, S. Athanasius is the first ecclesiastical
Only-begotten ;
nor could the flesh author who adopts it.
subsist by itself without the Word,
110 Greed sent into Gaul,
CouNc. dorus, and Mark into Gaul °. And tliey, as being sent from-
Arim.
AND ^j^g Council, deliver the following
^^
document to Constans
Seleu. Augustus of blessed memory ^, and to all who were there :
feSo^*'"'
^^^ believei in One God, the Father Almighty, Creator and Maker
or 4th of of all things ; from whom the whole family in heaven and on earth is
Antioch, named.
A.D. in His Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, who before
And
ages was begotten from the Father, God from God, Light from
^'^^'
all
Light, by whom all things were made in the heavens and on the earth,
visible and invisible, being Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and Life,
and True Light ; who in the last days was made man for us, and was
born of the Holy Virgin who was crucified, and dead, and buried,
;
and rose again from the dead the third day, and was taken up into
heaven, and sat down on the right hand of the Father and is coming ;
at the end of the world, to judge quick and dead, and to render to
into infinite ages'"; for He shall be seated on the right hand of the
Father, not only in this world but in that which is to come.
who had made war upon him and lu-ges, for their frequent Councils.
fallen in an engagement. He was at Still they do not seem to be able to
this time only 22 years of age. His escape from the argument of Athana-
enemies represent his character in no sius, that, whereas new Councils are
favourable light, but, for whatever for new heresies, if but one new heresy
reason, he sided with the Cathoh'cs, had risen, but one new Council was
and S. Athanasius, who had been hon- necessary. If these four Confessions
ourably treated by him in Gaul, speaks say the same thing, three of them
of him in the language of gratitude. must be superfluous, vid. infr. § 32.
In his apology to Constantius, he However, in spite of the identity of
" the Creed, the difference in their Ana-
says, thy brother of blessed memory
filled the Churches with offerings," themas is very great, as we shall see.
and he speaks of "the grace given "
These words, which answer to
him through baptism." § 7. [Hist, tracts those afterwards added at the second
p. 1 61 O.T.] Constans was murder- —
General Council (381 3) are directed
ed by Magnentius in 350, and one of against the doctrine of Marcellus, who
the calumnies against Athanasius was taught that the Word was but a divine
that he had sent letters to the mur- energy, manifested in Christ and re-
derer. tiring from Him at the consummation
The fourth, fifth,
'I and sixth- Con- of all things, when the manhood or
fessions are the same, and with them flesh of Christ would consequently no
hemg fourth creed of Eusehians, negative. Ill
And in the Holy Ghost, that is, the Paraclete; which, having Chap,
promised to the Apostles, He sent forth after His ascension into
II.
We believe in one God the Father Almighty, the Creator and ^th Con-
Maker of all things, from whom the whole family in heaven and on ^i?" .
only to the judgment season ?" ui. \7. servable also that the more Catholic
" Should
And, any ask concerning portions occur in the Anathemas, as
that flesh which is in the Word having if they were forced in indirectly, and
become immortal, we say to him, that that with an inconsistency with the
we count it not safe to pronounce other statements, for not only the word
on points of which we learn not for "substance" does not occur, but the
certain from divine Scripture." cont. Son is said to be made. At this date
Marc. ii. 4. the old Semi-arians, as Eusebius, As-
^
S. Hilary, as we have seen above, terius, and Acacius were either dying
p. &7. by implication calls this the off", or degenerating into most explicit
Nicene Anatlieina and so it is in the
; impiety; the new school of Semi-arians
respects in which he speaks of it but ; consisting for the most part of a
it omits many of the Nicene clauses, younger generation. S. CjtH deli-
and with tliem the condemnation of vered his Catechetical Lectures two
many of the Arian articles. The or three years later than this Creed,
especial point which it evades is our viz. 347 or 348. Silvanus, Eleusius,
Lord's eternal existence, substituting Meletius, Eusebius of Samosata are
for " once He was not," " there was later still.
112 The MacrosticJi Creed sent into lialij,
COUNC. And in His Only-begotten Son our Lord Jesus Christ, wlio
Akiu. before all
ages was begotten from the Father, God from God, Light
AND from Light, by whom all things were made, in heaven and on the
Seleu.
earth, visible and invisible, being Word and Wisdom and Power and
Life and True Light, who in the last days Avas made man for us,
and was born of the Holy Virgin, crucified and dead and buried,
and rose again from the dead the third day, and was taken up into
heaven, and sat down on the right hand of the Father, and is coming
at the end of the world to judge quick and dead, and to render to
Father not only in this world, but also in that which is to come.
And we believe in tlie Holy Ghost, that is, the Paraclete, which,
having promised to the Apostles, He sent forth after the ascension
into heaven, to teach them and to remind of all things through :
whom also shall be sanctified the souls of those who sincerely be-
lieve inHim.
But those who say, (1) that the Son was from notliing, or from
other subsistence and not from God (2) and that there was a time
;
or age when He was not, the Catholic and Holy Church regards as
aliens. Likewise those who say, (3) that there are three Gods :
(4) or that Christ is not God ; (5) or that before the ages He was
neither Christ nor Son of God (6) or that Father and Son, or Holy
;
Ghost, are the same ; (7) or that the Son is Ingenerate ; or that the
Father generated the Son, not by choice or will ; the Holy and
Catholic Church anathematizes.
(1.) For neither is safe to say that the Son is from nothing, (since
this is no where spoken of Him in divinely inspired Scripture,)
nor again of any other subsistence before existing beside the Father,
but from God alone do we define Him genuinely to be generated.
For the divine Word teaches that the Ingenerate and Unoriginate,
the Father of Christ, is One ^.
" There was
(2.) Nor may we, adopting the hazardous position.
once when He was not,"' from unscriptural sources, imagine any
interval of time before Him, but only the God who generated Him
apart from time for through Him both times and ages came to be.
;
and that the Son hath been generated before ages, and in no wise to ^t-
be ingenerate Himself Hke the Father, but to have the Father who
generated Him as His origin for the Head of Christ is God.
;
1 Cor. 11,
3-
(3.) Nor again, in confessing three realities and three Persons, of
^
the Father and the Son and the Holy Gliost according to the Scriptures, '^P"')'-
do we therefore make Gods three since we acknowledge the Self-
;
from Himself, and alone vouchsafes tiiis to all others bountifully. note u.
(4.) Nor again in saying that the Father of our F^ord Jesus Christ
isthe one only God, the only Ingenerate ; do we therefore deny that
Christ also is God before ages as the disciples of Paul of Samosata,
:
who say that after the incarnation He was by advance ^ made God, ^
e'f
'^po-
from being made by nature a mere man. For we acknowledge, that (^^^'J^-
P-
"
though He be subordinate to His Father and God, yet, being before
'
the Saraosatene doctrine; Paul saying proceeding from the Father without
that that dignity, which the Arians division, is the expression and likeness
ascribed to our Lord before His birth of what is proper to Him, being a siib-
in the flesli, was bestowed on Him sistent Word, and Uving from a Living
after it. vid. p. 115, ref. 1. Thus Father." Thesaur. p. 47. When the
" " and Fathers deny that our JiOrd is the
perfect according to nature
"true," will not be directly connected npocpopiKhs \6yos, they only mean that
with " God " so much as opposed to, that title is not, even as far as its
"by advance," "by adoption," &c. philosophical idea went, an adequate
p. I'OS, note 1. representative of Him, a word spoken
^
The use of the words eVSiaSeroy being insubstantive, vid. Athan. Orat.
and Kpo(popiKbs, mental and pronounc- ii. 35. Hil. de
Syn. 46. Cyr. Catech. xi.
ed, to distinguish the two senses nf 10. Damas. Rp. ii. p. 203. nee prola-
\6yos, reason and ii'ord, came from tivum ut generationem ei demas, for
the school of the Stoics, and is found this was the Arian doctrine. " The
in Philo, and was under certain limit- Son [says Eunomius] is other than
ations allowed in Catholic theology. the .Mental Word, or Word in intel-
Daniasc. F. (). ii. 21. To use either lectual action, of which partaking and
absokitely and to the exclusion of the being filled He is called the Pro-
other would have involved some form nounced Word, and expressive of the
of Sabellianisni, or Arianism as the Father's substance, that is, the Son."
case might be but each might correct
; CjTil in Joann. p. 31. [p. 36 O.T.]
the defective sense of either. S. Theo- The Gnostics seem to have held the
philus speaks of our Lord as at once x6yos 7rpo(popiK6s. Iren. User. ii. 12.
eVSiofleros and Kpo(popiK6s. ad Autol. ii. 120 O.T.] INIarcellus is said
n. 5. [p.
10 and 22, S. CjtU as ivSiddiros, in by Euscbius to have considered our
lU Tlie Macrostich Creed, sent into Italy,
Cgunc. mediator' or image of God before ages; but that He first be-
Arim. came Christ and Son of
God, when He took our flesh from the
-
AND
not four hundred years since. For they will have it that
Seleu. Virgin,
1 then Christ began His Kingdom, and that it will have an end
p. 107,
note e. after the consummation of all and the judgment^. Such are the
disciples of Marcellus and Scotinus of Galatian Ancyra, who, equally
''
with Jews, negative Christ's existence before ages, and His God-
head, and unending Kingdom, upon pretence of supporting the
divine Monarchy. We, on the contrary, regard Him not as simply
God's pronounced word or mental, but as Living God and Word,
existing in Himself, and Son of God and Christ ; being and abiding
with His Father before ages, and that not in foreknowledge only '^,
and q. other. Eccl. Theol. ii. 15. Sabellius both parties considered Him a creature,
thought our Lord the -rpocpopiKhs ac- and that the true Word and Wisdom
cording' to Epiph. Hter. p. 398, ])a- were attributes or energies of Almigh-
masc. Hier. 62. : Paul of Samosata the ty God. This Lucifer well observes to
ivSidderos. Epiph. Hier. 65. passim. Constantius in the course of one of the
Eusebius, Eccles. Theol. ii. 17. describes passagesabove quoted," Quid interesse
ovu" Lord as the Trpo<popiKhs while he arbitraris inter te et Paidum Samosa-
disowns it. tenura, vel eum tum ejus discipulum
"
This passage seems taken from tuum conscotinum, nisi quia tu ante
Eusebius, and partly from Marcellus's omnia dicas, ille vero post omnia ?"
own words, vid. supr. note r. S. C jril pp. 203, 4. A subordinate difference was
speaks of his doctrine in like terms. this, thatthe Samosatene, Photinian,
Catech. xv. 27. &c. considered oiu- Lord to be really
^
i. e. Photinus of Sirmium, the
pupil gifted with the true Word, whereas the
of Marcellus is meant, who published Arian did scarcely more than consider
his heresy about 343. A similar play Him framed after the pattern of it.
upon words is found in the case of other Photinus was condemned, after this
names; though Lucifer seems to think Council, at Sardica, (347 if not 344,)
that his name was really Scotinus and and if not
by Catholics at least by Euse-
that his friends changed it. de non bians at Milan (348) by the Catholics ;
;
pare. pp. 203, 220, -226. Thus Noetus and perhaps again in 351 ; at Sirmium
is called av6-i]Tos,
Epiph. Hfer. 57. 2 his see, by the Eusebians in 351 when
,
fin. and 8 :
Eudoxius, a.^6i,ios, Lucifer, he was deposed. He was an eloquent
pro Athan. i. p. 65. Moriend. p. 258 : man and popidar in his diocese, and
Eunomians among the Latins, (by a thus maintained his ground for some
confusion with Anomcean,) &vo)xoi, or years after his condemnation.
sine lege. Cod. Can. Ixi. 1. ap. Leon. '^
"This passage of the Apostle,"
Op. t. 3. p. 443 Vigilantius dormitan-
: Rom. i. 1 " [Marcellus] I know not why
.
by the prophets, and at last, became man, and manifested His own Chap.
Father to all men, and reigns to never-ending ages. For Christ has II.
all things,' not only that He is like in their belief in our Lord's absolute di-
will, but in subsistence, and existence, vinity. It would as naturally follow
and being; as divine Scripture teaches, to hold that our liord had no luunan
from spirit, life from life, light soul, but that His pre-existent nature
spirit
from light, God from God, true Son stood in the place of it: —
also that
from true, Wisdom fi'om the Wise His Mediatorship was no peculiarity
(iod and Father and once for all,
;
of His Incarnation, vid. p. 107, note e ;
like the Father in all things, as a son p. 119, note o.
2
116 The Macrostich Creed, sent into Italy,
the same manner of generation with the rest. For divine Scripture
teaches us really and truly that the Only-begotten Son was generated
sole and solely s.
Yet**, in saying that the Son is in Himself, and both lives and
exists like the Father, we do not on that account separate Him from
the Father, imagining place and interval between their union in the
way of bodies. For we believe that they are united with each other
'deDecr without mediator or distance ^ and that they exist inseparable all ;
that all in the West may know, l)oth the audacity of the slanders of
the heterodox, and as to the Orientals, tlieir ecclesiastical
judgment
eThe Confession does not liere in its very form an interpolation or ap-
comment on tlie clause ag-ainst our peiidix, while its doctrine bears distinc-
Lord's being' Ing'enerate, having' al- tive characters of soiu.'thing higher
ready noticed it under paraarrapli (2). tlian tli8 olil Sc'mi-arianism. The
It will be remarked that it still insists characteristic of that, as of other
upon the unscriptiu'alness of the Ca- shapes of the here«;y, was the ahsohite
tholic positions. The main subject of separation which it put between the
this paragraph the fleArjcrei yevvr\div, Father and the Son. They considered
which forms great part of the Arian Tliem as two ovaiai, '6/j.oi.ai like, but
question and controversy, is reserved not as bfj.oovaioL ; this very explana-
for Orat. iii. 59, &c. in v^hich Athan- tion of the word reKeios was '' inrle-
asius formally treats of it. He treats pendent" and "distinct." Language
of the text Prov. viii. '22. throughout then, such as that in the text, was the
Orat. ii. The doctrine of the fxovo- nearest assignaljle approach to the
yevis has already partially come before reception of the o/jloovo-iov ; all that
—
us in de Deer. § 7 9. p. 12, &c. ViSvws, was wanting was the doctrine of the
not as the creatures, vid. p. G2, note f. Trepix'^fTjo'is, of which infr. Orat. iii.
> This last It is observable that a hint is thrown
paragraph is the most
curious of the instances of the presence out by Athanasius about " sugges-
of tliis new and nameless influence, tions" fi'om without, a sentence or two
which seems at this time to have been aftei'wards. It is observable too that
14. However tliey did not stand even to this; for again & 27.
at Sirmium they met together ^ against Photinus and
^
',
ligliton the subject than any one else. brought together by fear and faction,
In 351, the Semi-arian party was still yielded to a party spirit a few, to ;
stronger than in 345. The leading whom faith was dear and truth preci-
person in this Council was Basil of ous, rejected the unjust judgment."
AncjTa, who is generally considered Hist. ii. 52 ; he instances Paulinus of
their head. Basil held a disputation Treves, wiiose resistance, however,
with Pliotinus. Silvanus too of Tarsus took place at Milan some years later.
now appears for the first time while, : Sozomen gives us a similar account,
according to Socrates, Mark of Are- speaking of a date a few years before
thusa, who was more connected with the Sirmian Council. "The East,"
the Eusebians tlian any other of his he says, " in spite of its being in fac-
party, drew up the Anathemas the ; tion after the Antiochene Council" of
Confession used was the same as that the Dedication, " and thenceforth
sent to Constans, of the Council of openly dissenting fi'om the Nicene
Philippopolis, and the Macrostich. faith, in reality, I think, concurred in
'
There had been no important Ori- the sentiment of the majority, and
ental Council held since that of the with them confessed the Son to be of
Dedication ten years before, till this of the Father's substance but from con- ;
63. Plulastrius and Vigilius call the resistance was unsuitable, leaned to
Council a meeting of " holy bishops" this side or that to gratify parties and ;
COUNC. We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, the Creator and
Arim. ]Maker of all things, /"ro»i whom the whole family in heaven and
AND
earth is named.
Seleu.
vi; Con,
And in His Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus the Christ, who
before all the ages was begotten from the Father, God from God,
fession,
or 1st Light from Light, by whom all things were made, in heaven and on
Sirmian. the
earth, visible and invisible, being Word and Wisdom and True
A.D.351
Light and Life, who in the last days was made man for us, and was
Eph. 3,
15.
born of the Holy Virgin, and crucified and dead and buried, and
rose again from the dead the third day, and was taken up into heaven,
and sat down on the right hand of the Father, and is coming at the
end of the world, to judge quick and dead, and to render to every
one according to his works whose Kingdom being unceasing en-
;
dures unto the infinite ages for He shall sit on the right hand of
;
the Father, not only in this world, but also in that Avhich is to come.
And in the Holy Ghost, that is, the Paraclete ; which, having
promised to the Apostltjs, to send forth after His ascension into
heaven, to teach and to remind them of all things. He did send ;
through whom
also are sanctified the souls of those who sincerely
beheve Him.
in
But those who say that the Son was from nothing or from
(1.)
>
vid. other subsistence ^ and not from God, and that there was time or
note on
Nic. age when He was not, the Holy and Catholic Church regards as
aliens.
Anath.
p. 66. (2.) Again we say. Whosoever says that the Father and the Son
are two Gods, be he anathema ".
(3.) And whosoever, saying that Christ is God, before ages Son
of God, does not confess that He subserved ^the Father for the
framing of the universe, be he anathema °.
" This Anathema which has oc- heretics is very mucli the same on tliis
curred in substance in the Macrostich, point of tlie Son's ministi'ation, with
and again infra, Anath. 18 and 23. is this essential difference of sense, that
a disclaimer on the part of the Euse- Catliolic writers mean a ministration
bian party of tlie charg^e brought internal to the divine substance and
against them with reason by the an instrument connatural with the
Catholics, of their in fact holding a Father, and Arius meant an external
supreme and a secondary God. In tlie and created medium of operation,
Macrostich it is disclaimed upon a vid. p. 12. note z. Thus S. Clement
" tlie All-harmonious
simple Arian basis. The Semi-arians calls our Lord
were more open to tliis
imputation ; Instrument (Spyavoy) of God." Pro-
Eusebius, as we have
seen above, dis- trept. p. 6 Eusebius " an animated
;
tinctly calling our Lord a second and and living instrument (^opyavov f/xxf/v-
another God. vid. p. 63, note g. It Xof,) nay, rather divine and vivific
will be observed tliat this Anatliema of every substance and nature." De-
contradicts the one which immediately monstr. iv. 4. S. Basil, on the other
follows, and the 11th, in which Christ hand, insists that the Arians reduced
is called God ; except, on the one our Lord to " an inanimate instru-
hand, the Father and Son are One ment." opyavov &^\jxov, though they
God, which was the Catholic doctrine, called Him virovpyhv reKei-oraTov, most
or, on the other, the Son is God in perfect minister or under-worker. adv.
name only, which was the pure Arian Eunom. ii. 21. Elsewhere he says,
Anomcean. " the nature of a cause is
or one, and the
"
The language of Catholics and nature of an instrument, opyavov, an-
heifig the sixth of the Eusehians, Semi-arian. 119
(11.) Whosoever shall explain / ajn the First and I am the Last, Is. 44,6.
and besides Me there is no God, which is said for the denial of idols
and of gods that are not, to the denial of the Only-begotten, before
ages God, as Jews do, be he anathema.
( 2.) Whosoever, because
1 it is said The Word icas made flesh, John 1,
14.
shall consider that the Word was changed into flesh, or shall say
that He underwent an alteration and took flesh, be he anathema °.
ing in Him as a co-operator," &c. in the Saviour took flesh only, irreligi-
Joann.p.48. [p.5.5 O.T.] Explanations ously imputing the notion of suffering
such as these secure for the Catholic to the impassil)le godhead." contr.
writers some freedom in their modes ApoUin. i. 15. vid. also Ambros. de
of speaking, e. g. we ha^e seen, supr. Fide, iii. 31. Salig in his de Eutychi-
p. 1.1, note d. that Athan. speaks of the anisnio ant. Eutychen takes notice of
Son, as "enjoined and ministering," none of the passages in the text.
iroo<na7T6n(vos, Koi yTrovpyit', Orat. il,
120 The first Creed of Sirmium, against Photinus,
of God was
COUNC. (13.) T^liosoever, as bearing the Only-begotten Son
Arim. crucified, shall say that His Godhead underwent conuption, or pas-
AND
sion, or alteration, or diminution, or destruction, be he anathema.
Seleu. ?»^r« Mvas not said
Gen. 1, (14.) Whosoever shall say that Le^ Us make
26. by the Father to the Son, but by God to Himself, be he anathema p.
1
(15.) Whosoever shall say that Abraham saw,
not the Son, but
p. 114,
ref. 2. the Ingenerate God or part of Him, be he anathema 9.
the Son as man,
(16.) Whosoever shall say that with Jacob, not
but the Ingenerate God or part of Him, did wrestle, be he ana-
thema '^.
Gen. 19, (17.) Whosoever shall explain, TJie Lord rained ^fi
re from the
24. Lord not of the Father and the Son, and says that He rained
p This Anathema is directed aefainst Justin. Trvph. 56. and 126. Iren. Hter,
the SabelUans, especially Marcellus, iv. 10. n. i.Tertull. de carn. Christ. 6.
who held the very opinion which it de- adv. Marc. iii. 9. adv. Prax. 16. Novat,
nounces, that tlie Almighty spake with de Trin. 18. Origen. in Gen. Hom. iv.
Himself. Euseb. Ecdes. Theol. ii. 15. 5. Cyprian, adv. Jud. ii. 5. Antioch.
The Jews said that Almij^hty God Svn.' contr. Paul, apud Routh. Rell. t.
spoke to the Angels. Basil, llexaem. 2. p. 469. Athan. Orat. ii. 13. Epiph.
fin. Others that tlie plural was used Ancor. 29 and 39. Hser. 71. 5. Chry-
as authorities on earth use it in way sost. in Gen. Hom. 41. 7. These refer-
of dignity. Theod. in Gen. 19. As to ences are principally from Petavius ;
the Clatholic Fathers, as is well known, also from Durseheus, who has written
this Coun-
they interpreted the text in the sense anelaboratecommentaryon
here given. It is scarcely necessary to cil. The implication alluded to above
is, that the Son isof
refer to instances I'etavius, however,
;
a visible substance,
cites the following. First those in and thus is natiu-aUy the manifestation
which the Eternal Father is considered of the I rj visible God. Petavius main-
to speak to the Son. Theopliilus, ad tains, and Bull denies (Uefens. F. D.
Autol. ii. 18; Novatian, de Trin. 'IQ; iv. 3.), that the doctrine is found in
Catholics, they differ in this remark- and tlie. next anathema for "partem
" in Petavius should
able respect, that in this and the fol- ejus Hilarj% pro-
lowing Canons they place certain in- pose to read "patrem" against the
terpretations of Scripture under the original text in Athan. yue'pos ai/ToD,and
sanction of an anathema, shewing how the obvious explanation of it by the
far less/Vfe the .system of heretics is phrase fiepos o/xoovaiov, which was not
than that of the Church. unfrequently in the mouths of Arian
1 This
again, in spite of the wording, objectors, vid. supr. p. 97. note i.
which is directed against the CathoUc >
This and the following Canon are
doctrine, and of an heretical impU- Catholic in their main doctrine, and
oation, Catholic interpretation,
is a miglit be illustrated, if necessarj', as
rid. (besides Philo de Somniis. i. 12.) the foregoing.
Semi-arian. 121
being the sixth of the Eusehians,
from Himself, be he anathema. For the Son Lord rained from the Chap.
"•
Father Lord.
is Lord and the Son
(18.) Whosoever hearing- that the Father
Lord and the Father and Son Lord, for there is Lord from Lord,
says there are two Gods, be he
anathema. For we do not place
the Son in the Father's order, but as subordinate to the Fat.ier;
for He did not descend upon Sodom without the Father's wilP, ""t*'
'p-118,
"•
nor did He rain from Himself, but from the Lord, that is, the
Father authorizing it. Nor is He of Himself set down on the
right hand, but He hears the Father saying-, Sit Thou on right My
Ps. 110,
hand.
(19.) ^Tliosoever says that the Father and the Son and the Holy
Ghost are one Person, be he anathema.
(20.) Whosoever, speaking of the Holy Ghost
as Paraclete, shall
say this again Whosoever shall not say that Christ is God, Son of
;
^
It was an expedient of the Mace- 6. But, as the Arians had first made
donians to deny that the Holy Spirit tliealternative only between Jng-ene-
was God because it was not usual to rate and created, and Athan. de Deer,
call HimIngenerate and perhaps to
; § 28. supr. p. .53, note g. shews that
theirform of heresy which was always generate is a third idea really distinct
implied in Arianism, and which began from one and the other, so S.Greg-,
toshew itself formallyamongthe Semi- Naz. adds, ;»-occs«/ie, iKiropevrhv, as
arians ten years later, tliis anathema an intermediate idea, contrasted with
may be traced. They asked the Ca- /H^fHfrrt/e,yet distinct from ^o-p/ifra^^.
tholics whether the Holy Spirit was Orat. xxxi. 8. In other words, /ng-^ne-
Jngenerate, generate, or created, for rate meam^, not on\y not generate, hut
into these three they divided all things, not from ani/ origin, vid. August, de
vid. Basil, in Sabell. et Ar. Hom. xxiv. Trin. xv. 26.
122 The second Creed of Sirmium, suhscrihed hy Hosius,
CouNC. the framing- of the Universe, but that from the time that He was
Arim. born of Mary, from thence He was called Christ and Son, and took
^^° an oriffin of beins; God, be he anathema.
§ 28. 15. Casting aside the whole of this, as if they had dis-
covered something better, they propound another faith, and
write at Sirmium in Latin what is here translated into
Greek'.
vii. Con- Whereas it has seemed good that there should be some discussion
fession, concerning faith, all pointshave been carefully investigated and dis-
^. . cussed at Sirmium in the presence of Valens, and Ursacius, and
Sirmian, ^ . .
357 trermnnus,
rest.
AD
It is held for certain that there is one God, the Father Almighty,
as also is preached in all the world.
And His One
Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, gene-
rated from Himbefore the ages; and that we may not speak of
John 20, two Gods, since the Lord Himself has said, f go to Mi/ Father and
17. I/our Father, and Mi/ God and your God. On this account He
TTopivon-ai is Qod of all, as also the Apostle has taught Is He God of the Jews :
5^™'
since there is one God ivho shall justify the circumcision from
faith, and the imcircumcision through faith ; and eveiy thing else
agrees, and has no ambiguity,
But since many persons are disturbed by questions concerning
what is called in Latin " Substantia," but in Greek " Usia," that is,
to make it undertsood more as to
" One in or
exactly, Substance,"
" Like
what is called, in substance," there ought to be no mention
of any of these at all, nor exposition of them in the Church, for
this reason and for this consideration, that in divine Scripture no-
thing is written about them, and that they are above men's knowledge
and above men's understanding and because no one can declare
;
Is, 53, 6. the Son's generation, as it is written. Who shall declare His genera-
tion ? for it is plain that the Father only knows how He generated
the Son, and again the Son how He has been generated by the Father.
And
to none can it be a question that the Father is greater for no :
one can doubt that the Father is greater in honour and dignity and
Godhead, and in the very name of Father, the Son Himself testifying,
vid. The Father that sent Me is greater than I. And no one is igno-
John 10,
rant, that it is Catholic doctrine, that there are two Persons of Father
lb 14 28
^"^ ^'^"' ^"*^ *^^^* ^^^^ Father is greater, and the Son subordinated ^
luTTore- to the Father together with aD things which the Father hassubordi.
vov. I
The Creed which follows was not this date, calls this a "blasphemia,"
and upon followed the Semi-arian
put forth by a Conncil, but at a meet- it
ing' of a few Arian Bishops, and the Council by way of protest at Ancyra.
it was tlie Con-
S. Hilarj^ tells us that
authorwasPotamius, Bishop of Lisbon.
It is important as marking the open fession which Hosius was imprisoned
separation of the Eusebians or Acacians and tortured into signing-. Whether
from the Semi-arians, and their adop- it isthe one which Pope Liberius sign-
tion of Anomoean tenets. Hilary, who ed is doubtful but he signed an Arian
;
nated to Him, and that the Father has no origin, and is invisible, Chap.
and immortal, and impassible; but that the Son has been generated iL — .
from the Father, God from God, Light from Light, and that His '^^'^°-
generation, as aforesaid, no one knows, but the Father only. And ^.^^ j^
that the Sou Himself and our Lord and God, took flesh, that is, a Deer. §
body, tliat is, man, from Mary the Virgin, as the Angel heralded be- 31. p. 56.
foreiiand ; and as all the Scriptures teach, and especially the Apostle Ofat. i.
himself, the doctor cf the Gentiles, Christ took man of Mary the p ; .
Virgin, through which He suffered. And the whole faith is summed Hser. 73.
up*, and secured in this, that a Trinity should ever be preserved, as U.
we read in the Gospel, Go ye and baptize all the nations in the Matt. 28,
Name oj' the Father and oj' the Sou and of the Holy Ghost. And 19.
entire and perfect is the number of the Trinity ; but the Paraclete, the
Holy Ghost, sent forth through the Son, came according to the promise,
that He might teach and sanctify the Apostles and all believers".
We decline not to bring forward the authentic faith published at ix. Con-
fession,
" It will be observed that this Con- the supposititious Sardican Confes- ^^ *'^'^'^"
A.D.
fession ; 1. by denying "two Gods," sion, (vid. above, pp. 84, 85, note c,) ^^^
and declaring that the One God is the and turns them into anotlier evidence 359.
God of Christ, inipUes that our Lord is of additional heresy involved in
tliis
to be used as being unscriptural, mys- non ergo passibilis Dei Spiritus, licet
terious, and leading to disturbance ;
in homine suo passus." Now the Sar-
3. it holds that the Father is greater dican Confession is thought ignorant,
than the Son "in honour, dignity, and as well as unauthoritative, (e. g. by
" 4. that the Son is
godhead ; subor- Natalis Alex. Ssec. 4. Diss. 29.) be-
dinate to the Father with all other cause it imputes to Valens and Ursa-
things ; 5. that it is the Father's clia- cius the following belief, which he
racteristic to be invisible and impas- supposes to be Patripassianism, but
sible. On
the last head, vid. supr. which exactly answers to this aspect
pp. 115. 119. notes f. o. They also and representation of Arianism on 6 :
say that our Lord, hominem suscep- \6yos koI on rh nvevfj-a koI fcrravpwdr}
isse per quern compassus est, a word koI icrcpdyn Ka\ a-n-edavev Kal avsarr].
which Phoebadius condemns in his re- Theod. Hist. ii. 6. p. 844.
marks on this Confession where, by:
"
Some critics suppose that the
the way, he uses the word " spiritus " transacthm really belongs to the se-
in the sense of Hilary and the Ante- cond instead of the third Confession
Nicene Fathers, in a connection which of Sirmiuni. Socrates connects it with
at once explains the obscure words of the second. Hist. ii. 30,
1 24 Creed of Seleucia, ninth of tlie Eusehians, Homoean.
COUNC. the Dedication at Antiocli though certainly our fathers at the time
>'
;
Arim. met for a particular suhject under investigation. But since
AND together
" One in substance" and " Like in substance have troubled
Seleu. i," many
'
dfJLOiOV persons in times past and up to this day, and since moreover some
are said recently to have devised the Son's
" Unlikeness- " to the Fa-
aiov
" " One in substance" and " Like in
av6iJLoiov ther, on their account we reject
Invisible God.
And we confess and believe in one God, the Father Almighty, the
Maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.
And we believe also in our Lord Jesus Christ, His Son, generated
from Him impassibly before all the ages, God the Word, God from
God, Only-begotten, light, life, truth, wisdom, power, through whom
allthings were made, in the heavens and on the earth, whether visible
or invisible. He, as we believe, at the end of the world, for the
abolishment of sin, took flesh of the Holy Virgin, and was made
man, and suffered for our sins, and rose again, and was taken up
into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and is
regards as aliens. And that to this faith that is equivalent which was
published lately at Sirmium, under sanction of his religiousness the
Emperor, is plain to all who read it.
istheir wont^ and witli certain additions against using even Chap.
'' II.
''
Subsistence of Father/ Son, and Holy Ghost, they trans-
mitted it to the Council at Ariminum, and compelled even
the Bishops in those parts to subscribe it, and those who
contradicted them they got banished by Constantius. And
it runs thus :
—
We believe in One God the Father Almighty, from whom are all X. Con-
fession
things ;
at Nice
in the* Only-begotten Son of God, begotten from God before
And and
all ages and before every oi'igin, by whom all things were made, Con-
visible and invisible, and begotten as only-begotten, only from the stanti-
Father only ", God from God, like to tlie Father that begat Him ac- nople.
A.D.359.
cording to the Scriptures ; whose generation no one knows, except 360.
the Father alone who begat Him. He as we acknowledge, the Only-
begotten Son of God, the Father sending Him,
came hither from the
heavens, as it is written, for the undoing of sin and death, and was
born of the Holy Ghost, of INIaiy the Virgin according to the flesh, as
it is written, and conversed with the disciples, and having fulfilled the
whole economy according to the Father's will, was crucified and dead
In the beginning of the following year the letter is required ; nor surely is
360 it was confirmed by a Council at there reason against writing what
Constantinople, after the termination there is health in confessing." de Syn.
of that of Ariminum, and to this con- 63. It should be added that at this
firmation Athanasius refers. Socrates Council Ulphilas the Apostle of the
says, Hist. ii. 37 fin. that they chose Goths, who had hitherto followed the
Nice in order to deceive the ignorant (Council of Niciea, conformed, and
with the notion that it was Nicsea, and thus became the means of spreading
their creed the Nicene faith, and the through his countrymen the Creed of
place is actually called Nicsea, in the Ariminum.
"
Acts of Ariminum preserved by Hilary, /jlovos e/c fxSvov. Though this isan
p. 1346. Such a measure, whether or Homffian or Acacian, not an Anomoean
not adopted in matter of fact, might Creed, this phrase may be considered
easily have had success, considering
a symptom of Anomcean influ-'nce ;
the existing state of the West. We fiSvos napa, or vnh, fiSvov being one
have seen, supr p. 76, note i, that special formula adopted by Eunomius,
S. Hilary had not heard the Nicene explanatory of fxovoyepns., in accord-
Creed till he came into Asia Minor ance with the original Arian theory,
A. D. 3.56. and he says of his Gallic mentioned de Deer. § 7. supra, p. 12.
and British brethren, " O blessed ye that tiie Son was the one instrument
in the liord and glorious, who hold of creation. Eunomius said that He
the perfect and apostolic faith in the alone was created by tiie Father alone ;
all other things being created by the
profession of your conscience, and up
to this time know not creeds in writ- Father, not alone, but through Him
ing. For ye needed not the letter, who whom alone He had first created, vid.
abounded in the Spirit ; nor looked for Cyril. Tliesatu-. 2b. p. 239. S.
Basil ob-
the hand's office for subscription, who serves that, if this be a true sense of
believed in the heart, and professed IxovoyevT}!, then no man is such, e.g.
with the mouth unto salvation. Nor Isaac, as being born of two, contr.
was it necessary for you as bishops to Eunom. ii. 21. Acacius has recourse
read, what was put into your hands as to Gnosticism, and illustrates the Arian
CouNc. and buried and descended to the parts below the earth at whom ;
Arim. hell itself shuddered who also rose from the dead on the third day,
:
those which have been afore condemned already, and whatever are of
modern date, being contrary to this published statement, be they
anathema ''.
18. However^ they did not stand even to this ; for coming
§ 31.
xi.Con- (Jown from Constantinople to Antioch. they were dissatisfied
Antioch. that they had written at all that the Son was '^ Like the
A.D.361.
Father, as the Scriptures say/' and putting their ideas upon
paper, 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 im-
Chap.
their blasphemy they were called by all Anomoeans, having
also the name of Exueontian ^, and the heretical Constantius
for the patron of their ungodliness, who persisting up to the
end in irreligion, and on the point of death, thought good
to be baptized not however by religious men, but by
*=
Euzoius ^, 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.
19. The forementioned parties then had proceeded thus § 32.
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 ?, but they will always be making
'
day. The Emperor had come to the if they were talking about what they
throne when almost a boy, and at this did not understand, and did not realize
time was but 44 years old. In the or- what they said, and were blindly impli-
dinary course of things, he might have cating themselves in evils of a fearfid
reigned till, humanly speaking, ortho- character. Thus Athan. call them robs
doxy was extinct. This passage shews T-?]S 'Apeiov ixavias viroKpnds- Orat. ii.
that Athanasius did not insert these § l.init. [infrap. 181J, and he sjjeaks
sections till two years after the com- of the evil spirit making them his sport,
position of the work itself; for Con- To7s vnoKpifo/jLivois Tr]v fxaviav avrov.
stantine died A.D. 361. ad Scrap, i. 1. And hence further it
'
Euzoius, at this time Arian Bishop is applied, as in this place,
though with
of Antioch, was exconinuinicated with severity, yet to those who were near
Arius in Egj-jtt and at Nicica, and was the truth, and who, though in sin,
restored witli him to the Church at the would at length come to it «ir not, ac-
Council of Jerusalem. He succeeded cording as the state of their liearts was.
at Antioch S. Meletius, who on being He is here anticipating the return into
placed in that see by the Arians pro- the Church of those whom he thus
128 Mo7'e Creeds in;pros]peci till
they submit to the Nicene.
CouNc.
parties against the trutli, until they return to themselves
A^ D and say, " Let us rise and go to our fathers^ and say unto
S^^^^-
them. We anathematize the
Arian heresy, and we acknow-
^ "
ledge the Nicene Council ; for against this is their
they all have one and the same meaning, what is the need
p. 110,
of many ~ ? But if need has arisen of so many, it follows
note q
that each by itself is deficient, not complete and they es- ;
^^
ON THE SYMBOLS "OP THE SUBSTANCE AND "ONE IN
SUBSTANCE."
We must look at the sense not the wording. The offence excited is at the
sense ; meaning of the Symbols ; the question of their not being in Scrip-
ture. Those who hesitate only at the latter of the two, not to be con-
sidered Arlans. Reasons " one in substance " better than " like in
why
substance," yet the latter may be interpreted in a good sense. Explanation
of the rejection of " one in substance " by the Council which condemned
Samosatene ; use of the word by Dionysius of Alexandria ; parallel variation
in the use of Ingenerate ; quotation from Ignatius and another ; reasons
for using " one in substance ;" objections to it ; examination of the word
1. But since they are thus minded both towards each Chap
III.
other and towards those who preceded them, proceed we
to ascertain fromthem what extravagance they have seen, § 33.
the Church had taken from philosophy was of a Sabellian tendency 5. that ;
and adopted as her own. Accordingly, it implied that the divine substance
Athan. goes on to propose such e.i- was distinct from God.
planations as might clear the way
K
130 They who held the doctrine, would admit the terms of Niccea.
8 '^U' 23 t^^^j ^^^ their own evil humours. If then ye can shew the
tei'ms to be actually unsound, do so and let the proof pro-
ceed, and drop the pretence of offence created, lest you come
into the condition of the Pharisees formerly, when, on pre-
Matt. 15, tending offence at the Lord^s teaching, He said. Every
^^'
^lant, which My heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be
rooted up. By. which He shewed that not the words of the
Father planted by Him were really an offence to them, but
that they misinterpreted good words and offended them-
selves. And in like manner they who at that time blamed
the Epistles of the Apostle, impeached, not Paul, but their
own deficient learning and distorted minds.
§ 34. 2. For answer what is much to the purpose. Who are
p. 138,
ref. 4.
Qj. ^^gxt
'
"
"
not to say inferior, then you should not have written that
the Son was from the Father, but from what is about Him
or in Him ® ; and so, shrinking from saying that God is
truly Father, and making Him compound who is simple, in
a material way, you will be authors of a new
blasphemy.
And, with such ideas, do you of necessity consider the Word
and the title " Son," not as a substance but as a name^ only ; ^
P- ^^'
and in consequence the views ye have ye hold as far as names
p. n4,'
partaking: of the Son Himself, we are supra, de Deer. p. 38, note z. Tluis
said to partake of Ood, and this is tliat Eusebius calls our Lord " the li^ht
which Pefer has said, that ye mig-ht
*
throughout theuniverse,moving-ro?/«</
be partakers of the divine nature,' as (afKpi) the Father." de Laud. Const,
" Know 5UL It was a Platonic idea, which
says also the Apostle, ye not p.
that ye are the temple of God, &c." he gained from Plotinus whom he ;
Arim.
AND and most shocking even to think of. But if, when we hear
Seleu. it said. Jam that I am, and. In the beginning God created the
Ex. 3,14. heaven and the earth, and, Hear, Israel, the Lord our God
Gen. 1,1,
Deut. 6, is one Lord, and, Thus saith the Lord
Almighty, we under-
4. stand nothing else than the very simple, and blessed, and
incomprehensible substance itself of Him that is, (for
though we be unable to master that He is, yet hearing
" " "
Father," and God," and Almighty," we understand
nothing else to be meant than the very substance of Him
1
p. 34, that is ;) and if ye too have said, that the Son is from God,
'
note s.
it follows that you have said that He is from the
" sub-
stance" of the Father. And since the Scriptures precede
you which say, that the Lord is Son of the Father, and the
Matt. 3, Father Himself precedes them, who says, Th is is My beloved
17.
Son, and a son is no other than the offspring from his father,
is it not evident that the Fathers have suitably said that the
Son is from the Father's substance ? considering that it is
Ps. 104, them. And not, ''who generates," but who maheth His angels
4v
spirits, and His 7ninisters a flame of fire. And though the
1 Cor. 8, Apostle has said. One God,
from whom all things, yet he
6.
says not this, as reckoning the Son with other things ; but,
2de whereas some of the Greeks consider^ that the creation
Deer,
was held together by chance, and from the combination of
p. 33,
ref. 1. atoms ^, and spontaneously from elements of similar struc-
^
Epicu- ture
rus. *, and has no cause and others consider that it came
;
*
Anaxa- from a cause, but not through the Word ; and each heretic
goras.
has imagined things at his will, and tells his fables about
the creation ; on this account the Apostle was obliged to
introduce from God, that he might thereby certify the
Maker, and shew that the universe was framed at His will.
1 Cor. 8, And accordingly he straightway proceeds : And one Lord
6.
Jesus Christ, through lohom all things, by way of exceofc-
6p.33.fin,
" all
p. 54. fin, .
ing the Sou from that ^," (for what is called God's
Objection that the Nicene Symbols are unscriptiiral. 133
wrote with greater explicitness, that the Son was '' from the P'
^^
substance. For this betokens the true genuineness of the
Son towards the Father ; whereas, in its being said simply
''from God," only the Creator's will concerning the framing
of all is signified. If then they too had this meaning, when
they wrote that the Word was from the Father," they had
''
COUNC. part; and on that account contend with their own Fathers?
Arim.
AND And, in what Scripture did they on their part find "Ingene-
Seleu. rate," and tlie name of "substance,'^ and "there are three
in substance ?" for if the Son is not like the Father ac-
"
cording to substance, how is He unvarying image of the
substance ?
" But if you are dissatisfied at having written
"
Unvarying Image of the substance," how is it that ye
" anathematize those who
say that the Son is Unlike ?" for
if He be not according to substance like. He is altogether
then it does not hold that he that hath seen the Son, hath John 14,
the Bishop made him deacon, that using the name of the
diaconate as a sheep's clothing, he might be able with
essential likeness was to suppose in- Athanasius of Nazarbi then the pupil
;
the ground that when we speak of ning of 360 he was formally condemn-
"
like," we imply qualities, not sub- ed in the Council of Constantinople,
stance. According to him then the which confirmed the Creed of Arimi-
phrase "unvarying image" was, strict- num, and just before Eudoxius had
ly speaking, self-contradictory, for been obliged to anathematize his con-
every image varies from the original fession of faith. This was at the
very
because it is an image. Yet he him- time Athan. wrote the present work.
'
And all human terms are imperfect ; thou such a slave to the letter, and
and "image"itself is used in Scripture. takest up with Jewish wisdom, and
Scrijpture uses terms not in Scripture. 137
in faith and verify, as having the mind of Christ, and what j^ xim. 2
he speaks, he utters religiously. What then is there even 7
"
'
brothers witli brothers^, wbo mean wliat we mean, and dis- Chap.
pute only about the word. For, confessing that the Son
is _ill:_
from the substance of the Father, and not from other sub- p,^i4i^
sistence and that He is not a creature nor work, but His ref. 5.
",
the Father as being His Word and AVisdom, they are not
far from accepting even the phrase "One in Substance;" of
whom is Basil of Ancyi'a, in what he has written concerning
the faith''. For only to say "like according to substance,"
" of the ^
is very far from signifying substance'^," by which, P- 64»
rather, as they say themselves, the genuineness of the Son
to the Father is signified. Thus tin is only like to silver,
a wolf to a dog, and gilt brass to the true metal; but tin is
not from silver, nor could a wolf be accounted the offspring
of a dog'. But since they say that He is "of the substance"
and "Like in substance," what do they signify by these but
"One in substance™?" For, while to say only "Like in
substance," does not necessarily convey "of the substance,"
on the contrary, to say " One in substance," is to signify
" Like in " of
the meaning of both terms, substance," and
the substance." And accordingly they themselves in con-
troversy with those who say that the Word is a creature,
instead of allowing Him to be genuine Son, have taken their
proofs against them from human illustrations of son and
father", with this exception that God is not as man, nor the
generation of the Son as offspring of man, but as one which
''
Basil, who wrote against iSIarcel- their unscrupulous slanders.
lus, and was placed by the Arians in So also de Deer. § 23. p. 40. Uyp.
'
his see, h:is little mention in history Mel. et Euseb. Hil. de Syn. 89. ^ad.
tillthe date of the Council of Sardica, p. 35, note u ; p. 64, note i. The illus-
which deposed him. Constantius, trationruns into thisposition, "Things
however, stood his friend, till the be- that are Uke, cannot be the same." vid.
ginningof the year 360, when Acacius p. 136, note g. On the other hand,
supplanted him in the Imperial favour, Athan. himself contends for the raxnhv
and he was banislied into Illyricum. " the same in likeness."
t^ ifxaiwan,
This was a month or two later than de Deer. § 20. p. 35. vid. infr. note r.
the date at which Athan. wi-ote his "vid. Socr. iii. 25. p. 204. a. b. Una
first draught or edition of this work, suhstftntia religiose prsedicabitur (juae
He was condemned upon charges of ex ««^/iv7rt^/*proprietateetexnaturje
tjTanny, and the like, but Theodoret simUitudine ita indifferens sit, ut una
speaks highly of his correctness of life dicatur. Ilil. de Syn. G7.
and Sozomen of his learning and elo- ° Here at last Athan. alludes to the
quence. vid. Theod. Hist. ii. 20. Soz. Ancyrene Synodal Letter, vid. Kpiph.
ii. 33. A very little conscientiousness, Hasr. 73. 5 and 7. about which he has
or even decency of manners, would put kept a pointed silence above, when
a man in strong relief with the great tracing the course of the Arian con-
Arian party which surrounded the fessions. That is, he treats the Semi-
Court, and a very great deal would not arians as tenderly as S. Hilary, as soon
havebeenenoughtosecurehim against as they break company with the
140 Tlxe Son of God not Wee a liuman offspring.
Sei,eu. and the Son the Radiance of the Eternal Light, and the Off-
spring from the Fountain, as He says, I am the Life, and, I
John 14,
p'rov. 8 Wisdom dwell with Prudence. But the Radiance from the
12.
Light, and Offspring from Fountain, and Son from Father,
how can these be so as " One in
suitably expressed by
substance V
12. And there any cause of fear, lest, because the off-
is
offspring too? perish the thought! not so; but the ex-
planation is easy. For the Son is the Father's Word and
Wisdom ;
whence we learn the impassibility and indivisi-
'
airaQes
bility^ of such a generation from the Father". For not even
CLfXipiff-
TOV man's word is part of him, nor proceeds from him accord-
Deer. ing to passion"; much less God's Word; whom the Father
§ 10. has declared to be His own Son, lest, on the other hand, if we
p. 17.
Arians. The Aneyrene Council of 358 preached ;
but that no one may un-
was a protest against the " blasphe- derstand a human offspring, signifying
mia" or second Sirmian Confession, His substance a second time, it calls
whicli Hosius signed. Him Word, and Wisdom, and Radi-
> It is usual with the Fathers to use ance." Orat. i. § 28 [infra p. 221] vid. .
the two terms " Son " and "Word," to p. 20, note t. vid. also iv. § 8. Euseb.
guard and complete the ordinary sense contr. Marc. ii. 4. p. 54. Isid. Pel. Ep.
of each other. Their doctrine is that iv. 141. So S. Cyril says that we learn
" from His
our Lord is both, in a certain transcend- being called Son that He is
ent, prototj-pical, and singular sense ; from Him, rh e| axnov; from His being
that in that higli sense that are coinci- called Wisdom and Word,ti)at He is in
dent with one another; that they are Him,"Tb iv avTui. Thesaur. iv. p. 31.
applied to human things by an accom- However, S.Athanasius obsei'ves, that
modation, as far as these are shadows properly speaking the one term implies
of Him to whom the i. e. in its fulness.
" Since
properly they really other,
belong ; that being but partially rea- the Son's being is from the Father,
lized on earth, the ideas gained from therefore He is in the Father." Orat.
the earthly types are but imperfect ; iii. §3
[infra p. 402] "If not Son, not
.
that in consequence if any one of them Word either; and if not Word, not Son.
is used exclusively of Him, it tends to For what is from the Father is Son ;
introduce wrong ideas respecting Him; and what is from the Father, but the
but that their respective imperfections Word, &c." Orat. iv. § 24 fin. [infra
lying on different sides, when used to- p.542] On the other hand the heretics
.
"
merely heard of Word/' we should suppose Him, such as Chap.
is the word of man, unsubsistent ^ ; but that,
hearing that -^-ili'
—
He is Son, we may acknowledge Him to be a living Word f^Tarov
*
and a substantive " Wisdom. Accordingly, as in saying
fvovcnov
are not here used about different subjects, but of whom ^^'
Samosatene " have laid down in writing that the Son is not Hiia""-
one in substance with the Father, and so it comes to pass that 81 init,'
"
There were throe Councils held which contrary to the opinion of Pagi, ^-Pip''-
against Paul of Sainosata, of the dates S. Basnage, and Tillemont, Pearson Haer. 73.
of 264, 269, and an intermediate fixes at 265 or 'IGQ. ^'^'
year,
The third is spoken of in the text,
142 Dionysins used " One in Suhsfance," if not AntiocJienes.
CouNc. they, for reverence and honour towards the aforesaid, thus feel
Arim.
AND about that expression, it will be to the purpose reverently to
Seleu. argue with them this point also. Certainly it is unbecom-
ing- to make the one company conflict with the other ; for all
are fathers ; nor is it religious to settle, that these have
spoken well, and those ill ; for all of them have gone to sleep
in Christ. Nor is it right to be disputatious, and to compare
the respective numbers of those who met in the Councils, or
the three hundred may seem to throw the lesser into the
shade; nor to compare the dates, lest those who preceded
seem to eclipse those that came after. For all, I say, are
Fathers ; and, any how the three hundred laid down nothing
new, nor was it in any self-confidence that they became
champions of words not in Scripture, but they started from
their Fathers, as the others, and they used their words. For
there were two Bishops of the name of Dionysius, much
older than the seventy who deposed Samosatene, of whom
one was of Eome, and the other of Alexandria; and a
charge had been laid by some persons against the Bishop of
Alexandria before the Bishop of Borne, as if he had said
that the Son was made, and not one in substance with the
Father. This had given great pain to the Eoman Council ;
and the Bishop of Rome expressed their united sentiments
in a letter to his namesake. This led to his writing an ex-
planation which he calls the Book of Refutation and Apology;
and it runs thus :
name, for that neither the fountain was called stream, nor the stream Chap.
fountain, but both existed, and that the fountain was as it were HI-
father, but the stream was what was generated from the fountain.
15, Thus the Bishop. If then any one finds fault with § 45.
the Fathers at Nicsea, as if they contradicted the decisions
of their predecessors, he may reasonably find fault also with
the Seventy, because they did not keep to the statements
of their own predecessors ; for such were the two Dionysii
and the Bishops assembled on that occasion at Rome. But
neither these nor those is it religious to blame; for all
were legates of the things of Christ, and all gave diligence
against the heretics, and while the one party condemned
Samosatene, the other condemned the Arian heresy. And
rightly did both these and those define, and suitably to the
matter in hand. And as the blessed Apostle, writing to the
Komans, said, The Law is spiritual, the Laiv is holy, and Rom. 7,
the commandment holy and just and good ; (and soon after,
Wliat the Law could not do, in that it was weak,) but wrote lb. 8, 3.
'
to the Hebrews, The Law made no one perfect ; and to the jg,
'
stances, one the previous substance, and the other two from
it;" and therefore guarding against this they said with
good reason, that Christ was not One in substance p. For
P This is in fact the objection which stance, snpr. § IfJ. when he calls it the
Arius urges against the One in sub- doctrine of Manicha3us and Hieracas,
144 Wliy the Council of Antioch declined ''One in Substance."
was not before Mary, but received from her the origin of
His being, therefore the assembled Fathers deposed him and
pronounced him heretic ; but concerning the Son's Godhead
writing in simplicity, they arrived not at accuracy concern-
ing the One in substance, but, as they understood the word,
so spoke they about it. For they dii'ected all their thoughts
to destroy the device of Samosatene, and to shew that the -
between the Son and the Father, did not confess that the Hsr/zs.
Son is like the Father according to substance, or according 9 ^^•
to nature, but because of Their agreement of doctrines and
"
of teaching ; nay, when they drew a line and an utter ^ P- 1^7,
distinction between the Son's substance and the Father,
ascribing to Him an origin of being, other than the Father,
and degrading Him to the creatures, on this account the
Bishops assembled at Niceea, with a view to the craft of the
parties so thinking, and as bringing together the sense
from the Scriptures, cleared up the point, by affirming the
" One in substance
•/' that both the true genuineness of the
^
tV rrjs dfiotdxTfois evSrTira : and elvai, of the Son," iii. § 5 fin. [infra
so Tahrhv rfj S/xoiuxret de Deer. § 20. p. 406] . The Fatlier's godhead is the
p. 35 ; evSrrira ttjs (pvaecos Koi Tr)V
T7)j/ Son's, rh iraTpiKhu (pus 6 vi6i. iii. § 53
ravrdTTira tov (pccTiis. ibid. § 24. p. 41 [p. 475]; fxiavr^v diirrjTa koI rb J'Sioj'
init. ; also § 23. And Basil. ravT6r-r)Ta rris ovarias tov -KarpSs. § 56 [p. 478J;
Tijs (pvffews, Ep. 8.3: Ta&TdrrjTa rrjs "As tlie water is the same which is
ouo-iay. Cyrilin Joan. lib. iii. e.v.p. 302. poured from fountain into stream, so
[p. 350 O.T.] Hence it is
uniformly the g-odliead of the Father into the
asserted by the Catholics that the Fa- Son is intransitive and iiidivisil)le, ap-
ther's godliead, deSrris, is the Sou's ; fnvtrrCis kuI aSiatpirccs. Expos. § 2. vid.
" the Father's note This is the doctrine of
e.g. godhead being in p. 155, f.
the Son," infr. § 52 [p. 155] ; 7} irarpiKij the Una lies, which, being not defined
</)u(ris aiiToC.Orat.i. § 40 [iniVap.237J; in General ('oimcil till the foiu'th lia-
"
worshipped Kara rr]v KaTpiK7]v I5i6- teran, many most injuriously accuse
TrjTo. § 42 [infra p. 240] TraTpiKvv ;
the Greek Fathers, as the two Gre-
avTov d(6TTriTa. § 45 fin. § 49 fin. ii. gories, of denying. Tliat Council is
§ 18. § 73 fin. iii. § 26 ;
" the Father's not here referred to as of authority,
godhead and propriety is the being, rb
"
146 As "On^ in Substance" so Ingenerate'^ variously used.
scent of sesame-cake, and the burning unsheath the sword which cut off the
of agate, and the smoke of storax, so head of their own monstrous heresy,"
do Arius and Sabellius hate the notion Ambros. de Fid. iii, 15.
We ought to enter into the Fathers' memiing, not carp at it. 147
CouNc. once more the matter, calmly and wltli a good understanding,
Arim. ^-^Jj reference to wliat has been said
.
before, viz. whether the
Seleu. collected at Nicaea did not really exercise an ex-
Bishops
cellent judgment. For if the Word be a work and foreign
to the Father's substance, so tliat He is separated from the
Father by the difference of nature, He cannot be one in
substance with Him, but rather He is homogeneous by
'
supr. nature with the works, though He surpass them in grace ^.
•* *^"
On the other hand, if we confess that He is not a work but
the genuine offspring of the Father's substance, it would
follow that He is inseparable from the Father, being con-
2
6fio<pv^ natural -, because He is begotten from Him. And being
such, goodreason He should be called One in Substance.
Next, if the Son be not such from participation % but is in
3
fierov-
*
p. 155, substance is the offspring of the Father's substance ^ and
is of the light, and the Son says,
John^io ' i*s likeness as the radiance
30. I and the Father are One, and, he that hath seen Me, hath
lb. 14, 9.
^^^^ Father, how must we understand these words ? or
^j^^
ref. 2.
The Son has all tilings of the Father, hut heing the Father. 149
said in Scripture of tlie Son also, all but His being called Chap.
III.
Father^. For the Son Himself says, All things that the
Father hath are Mi7ie; and He says to tbe Father, All Mine 15.
are Thine, and Thine are Mine:— as for instance^, the name lb- 17. 10.
God; Word
for the
-.-.-..
saith
vid.
orat. iii.
that and
is, and
that ivas, come, Almighty — W^
that is to the ;
says, the
•
I 1 r\ • io\m
Apoc.1,8.
1,1.
theFather I do
do,
—the being Everlasting, His
also; eternal
^^''"
lb. 1, 3.
^ower and godhead, and. In the beginning was the Word, and, Jj'^j^' J
He was the true Light, ivhich lighteth every man that cometh 20.
'into the world; —
the being Lord, for. The Lord rained fire j^'^ ' *
and hrimstone from the Lord, and the Father says, I am the Gen. 19,
Lord, and. Thus saith the Lord, the Almighty God; and of j^j^^g 5^
the Son Paul speaks thus, One Lord Jesus Christ, through l Cor. 8,
whom all things. And on the Father Angels serve, and
again the Son too is worshipped by them. And let all the Heb. 1,6.
Angels of God ivorship Him; and He is said to be Lord of
Angels, for the Angels ministered unto Him, and the Son of Matt. 4,
Man shall send His Angels. The being honoured as the jjj"24 31,
Father, for that they may honour the Son, He says, as they John 5,
honour the Father;—being equal God, He thought to it not
True, and Life from the Living, as being truly from the
Fountain of the Father —the quickening and raising
;
the
dead as the Father, for so we read in the Gospel. And of
the Father it is written. The Lord thy God is One Lord, and, Deut, 6,
The God of gods, the Lord, hath spoken, and hath called the pg, 50, 1,
earth; and of the Son, The Lord God hath shined upon us,
lb. 118,
and. The God of gods shall be seen in Sion. And again of ib.' 83, 7.
Godj Esaias says, Who is a God like unto TJiee, taking away ^'^P^'
.
18
X "
By the Son being equal to the aTrapdWaKros Kara -Kavra S/xoia tq>
Father," is but meant that He is His Trarpi, irXiju rrji ayewnaias Kal t^s
"unvarying image ;" it does not irarpc^TTjTo?. Damasc. de Imag. iii. 18.
p. 354. vid. also
Basil, contr. Eun.
imply any distinction of substance,
"PerfectiB fequalitatis significantiam ii. 28. Theod. Inconfus. p. 91. Basil.
Hil. de Syn. 73. For tlie Son is the
habet similitudo." Ep. 38. 7 fin.
But tliougli He is in all things His Image of the Father, not as Father,
Image, tliis implies some exception, but as God. Tlie Arianson the other
"
for else He vrouldnot be like or equal, hand, objecting the phrase unvary-
butthe same. " Non est sequalitas in ing image," aslted vihy the Son was
dissiniilibus, nee simiUtudo est intra not in consequence a Father, and the
unum." ibid. 72. Hence He is the beginning of a 06O7oi'ia. Athan. Orat.
Fatlier's image in all things except in i. 21 [infra p.
210]. vid. infra, note z.
being the Father, ukuv ^uctwtj Kal
150 The Son is One with the Father', because equal to Him.
'
the King eternal; and again of the Son, David in the Psalm,
,17. Lift up your heads, ye gates, and be ye lift up ye everlast-
Ps. 24, 7.
i^-^g doors,
and the King of glory shall come in. And Daniel
'
"^Iws'
-^^^ ^^ must take reverent heed, lest transferring what is
Isa. 42, saying. My glory I \viU not give to another, and be discovered
"•
worshipping this alien God, and be accounted such as were
John 10, the Jews of that day, who said. Wherefore dost Thou, being
^^' a man, make Thyself God? referring, the while, to an-
other source the things of the Spirit, and blasphemously
Luke 11, saying, Be casteth out devils through Beelzebub. But if
^^' this is shocking, plainly the Son is not unlike in sub-
the Father, you make Him not a Son remaineth what He is, and is not called
but a brother.' The Father and the brother of any by nature. What place
Son are not from any pre-existing^ then shall brotherhood have in such ?"
origin, that they should be thought Thesaur. pp. 22, 23. vid. Athan. Orat.
brothers, but the Father is origin of i. § 14.
''
152 One hi Siibstance" docs not imply a wliole and parts.
GOUNC. interpretation, and what Greeks say liave no claim upon us%
Aeim.
still let us see whether those things which are called one in
AND
Seleu. substance and are collateral, as derived from one substance
pre-supposed, are one in substance with each other, or with
the substance from which they are generated. For if only
with each other, then are they other in substance and unlike,
when referred to that substance which generated them; for
other in substance is opposed to one in substance ; but if
perly it stood for a species or genus, wairep SajSeXAio; koI BaXevriyo} SoKe7.
vid. Petav. de Trin. iv. 1. § 2. but as Theod. Hist. i. 3. p. 743. In like man-
Anastasiiis observes in many places ner. Damascene, speaking of the Ja-
of his Viae dux, Christian theology cobite use of '}>v(TLS and virdaraffis says,
innovated on the sense of Aristotelie " Who of holy men ever thus spoke ?
terms, vid. c. I. p. 20. c. 6. p. 96. c, 9. unless ye introduce to us your St. Aris-
p. 150. c. 17. p. 308. There is some totle, as a thirteenth Apostle, and
difficulty in determining how it in- prefer the idolater to the divinely
novated. Anastasius and Theorian, inspired." cont. Jacob. 10. p. 399.
Hodeg. 6. Legat. ad Arm. pp. 441, 2. and so again Leontius, speaking of
says that it takes ohffia. to mean an Philoponus, who from the Monophy-
universal or species, but this is nothing site confusion of nature and hypostasis
else than the second or improper Greek was led into Tritheism. *'"He thus
use. Rather it takes the word in a argued, taking his start fi-om Aristo-
sense of its own, such as we liave no telie principles ;for Aristotle says that
example of in things created, viz. tliat there are of mdividuals particiUar sub-
of a Being numerically one, subsisting stances as well as one common," de
in three persons so tliat the word is
;
Sect. V. fin.
a predicable or in one sense universal, •*
The argument, when drawn out,
without ceasing to be individual in ; is virtually this : if, because two sub-
which consists the mystery of the Holy jects are consubstantial, a thu-d is pre-
Trinity. However, heretics, who re- supposed of which they partake, then,
fused the mystery, objected it to since either of these two is consubstan-
Catholics in its primary pliilosophical tialwith that of which both partake, a
sense; and then, as standing for an new third must be supposed in wliich
individual substance, when applied to it and the
pre-existing substance par-
Father and Son, it either implied the take, and thus an infinite series of
parts of a material subject, or it in- things consubstantial must be sup-
Tolved no real distinction of persons, posed. The only mode (which he puts
i. e. Sabellianism. The former of these
first) ofmeeting this, is to deny that
two alternatives is implied in the text the two tilings are consubstantial with
"
by the Greek use ;" the latter by tlie the supposed third ; but if so,
they
same phrase as used by the conform- must be different in substance from it;
ing Semi-arians, A.D. 363. "Nor, as that is, they must differ from that, as
if any passion were supposed of the partaking of which, they are like each
ineffable generation,
'
is the term
'
sub- other, —
which is absurd, vid. BaslL
stance taken by the Fathers, &c. nor Ep. 52. n. 2.
"One in Substance" docs not imi^hj two substances. 153
Gen. 3, Jacob, as
Scripture says. The sun rose upon him ivhen the
31.
Face of God passed by; and beholding this, and understand-
Sept.
ing of whom He was Son and Image, the holy Prophets say,
The Word of the Lord came to me ; and the recognising
'Father, who was beheld and revealed in Him, they were
Exod. 3, bold to say. The God of our fathers hath appeared imto me,
16.
the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and this
Jacob;) being so,
wherefore scruple we to call Him one in substance who is
one with the Father, and appears as doth the Father, ac-
cording to likeness and oneness of godhead ? For if, as
has been many times said. He has it not to be proper to the
Father^s substance, nor to resemble, as a Son, we may well
scruple for if this be the illuminating and creative Power,
:
§ 31. and
p. 14,
on a level with the Creator, and are honoured as He is, or
note b. to be thought one with the Father. Or let a man ven-
ture to make the distinction, that the sun and the radiance
are two lights, or different substances or to say that the ;
and uncompounded offspring from the sun such, that sun Chap. ;
'—
and radiance are two, but the light one, because the radi-
•ance is an offspring from the Sun. But, whereas not more
divisible, nay less divisible is the nature of the Son
^
towards
the Father, and the godhead not accruing to the Son, but
the Father's godhead being in the Son, so that he that hath
seen the Son hath seen the Father in Him ; wherefore
should not such a one be called One in substance ?
•
Even this is sufficient to dissuade you from blaming
25. § 53.
those who have said that the Son was one in substance with
" One in
the Father, and yet let us examine the very term
substance," in itself, by way of seeing whether we ought
to use it at all, it be a proper term, and is
and whether
suitable to apply to the Son. For you know yourselves,
and no one can dispute it, that Like is not predicated of
substances, but of habits, and qualities ; for in the case
of
substances we speak, not of likeness, but of identity s. Man,
'
here used for per-
is
" man isfather of man," not meaning
(pvffis, nature,
son. This seems an Alexandrian use of by man the same individual in both
the word. It is found in Alexander, ap. cases, but the same nature, so here we
Theod. Hist. i. 3.
p. 740. And it ^ives speak not of the same Person in the
rise to a celebrated question in the two cases, but the same Individuum.
Monopliysite controversy, as used in S. All these expessions resolve them-
selves into the origin'al mystery of the
'CjTil's phrase fi.ia (pvais ffeffapKonixevri.
S. Cyril uses the word both for person Holy Trinity, that Person and Indivi-
and for substance successively in the duum are not equivalent terms, and
" we understand them neither more nor
following passage. Perhaps some one
will say,
'
How the Holy and Ador-
is less than we understand it. In likeman-
able Trinity distinguished into three ner as regards the incarnation, when
" God was in
Jlypostases, yet issues in one nature of S. Paul says Christ;" he
Godhead ?' Because the Same in sub- does not mean absolutely the Divine
stance necessarily following the differ- Natui"e, which is the proper sense of
ence of natures, recalls the minds of the word, but the Divine Nature as ex-
believers to one nature of Godhead." isting in the Person of the Son. Hence
«ontr. Nest. iii. p. 91. In this passage too, (vid. Petav. de Trin. vi. 10. § 6.)
" One nature" stands for a
reality but; such phrases as " the Father begat the
" three Natures" is the One Eternal Son from His substance." And in like
t)ivine Nature viewed in that respect in manner Athan. just afterwards, speaks
" the Father's Godhead
which He is Three. And so S. Hilary, of being in the
naturcB ex natura gignente nativitas ; Son." vid. supr. p. 145, note r.
de Syn. 17. and essentia de essentia, B S. Athanasius, in
saying that like
is not used of substance, implies that
August, de Trin. vii. n. 3. and de seipso
genuit Deus id quod est, de Fid. et the proper Arian senses of the B/j-oiov
Symb. 4. i. e. He is the Adorable 6e6Tris are more natural, and therefore the
or Godhead viewed as begotten. And more probable, if the word came into
Atlian. Orat. iv. § 1. calls the Son e| use. These were, 1. likeness in will
ovffias ovo-iwdris. vid. supr. p. 148. ref. and (tction, as (xv^i.<pci>vla, of which infr.
4. These phrases mean that the Son Orat. iii. 11: 2. likeness to the idea
who is the Divine Substance, is fiom in God's mind in which the Son was
the Father who is the [same] divine created. Cyiil Thesaur. p. 134; 3. like-
substance. As (tospeak of what is ana- ness to the divine act or energy by
logous not parallel,) we might say that which He was created. Pseudo-Basil.
156 Ifive helieve the Nicene sense, let us accept the ivovds.
AND
Seleu. one in nature. And again,
but to be other in nature.
...
CouNc. for instance^ is said to be like man, not in substance^ but
accordius* to habit and character : for in substance men are
*=>
Scripture, ive shall he like Him; like, that is, not in sub-
stance but in sonship, which we shall partake from Him.
^fxerovala If then ye speak of the Son as being by participation %
then indeed call Him Like in substance ; but thus spoken
of, He is not Truth, nor Light at all, nor in nature God.
For things which are from participation, are called like, not
in reality, but from resemblance to reality; so that they
AEm?* Postscript.
AND
had written my account of the Council^ I
28. After I
s
55^
had information that the most irreligious ~ Constantius had
sent Letters to the Bishops remaining in Ariminum ; and I
1
p. 88,
legates. We
ask then that you will with serene countenance com-
mand these letters of our mediocrity to be read before you ; as well
as will graciously receive those, with which we
charged our legates.
Tills however your gentleness comprehends as well as we, that great
^ These two Letters are both in Socr. ii. 37. And the latter is in Theod.
Hist. ii. 15. p. 878. in a different version from the Latin
original.
Letter of the Council of Ariminum to Constantkis, 159
" Dicam non jactantifB causa, sed ut me dictum omnes arbitrentur. Petav.
eiiiditi lectorisstudhim excitem, for- Animadv. in Epiph. p. ^^06. Nos ex
tassis audacius, ab luiic mille ac ducen- antiquis patribus primum illud odorati
tis propeniodum aiinis liquidam ac sumus, ties omnino conventus Epis-
sinceram illoiuni rationem ignoratara coporum eodeni in Sirniiensi oppido,
fuisse. Quod nisi certissimis argu- non iisdeni teniporibus celebrates fu-
mentis indiciisqnt' nionstravero, nihil isse. ibid. p. 113.
This was the Confession which Pope Liberius signed according to Note
Baronius, N. Alexander, and Constant in Hil. note n. p. 1335 7, I- —
and as Tillemont thinks probable. Counc
In p. 114, note b. supr. the successive condemnations of Photinus ^^^1^/
are enumerated ; but as this is an intricate point on which there is and
considerable diflference of opinion among critics, it may be advisable Seleu.
to state them here, as they are determined by various writers.
Petavius (de Photino Hseretico, 1.), enumerates in all five Coun-
cils :
—
I. at Constantinople, A.D. 336, when JNIarcellus w^as deposed,
sius places it with Sirmond in 346 ; but for the Council of Sirmium
in 349, they substitute a Council of Rome of the same date, while
de Marca considers Photinus condemned again in the Eusebian Coun-
cil of Milan in 355. De la Roque, on the other hand (Larroquan.
Dissert, de Photino Hser.), considers that Photinus was condemned,
1. in the Macrostich, 346 [345J. 2. at Sardica, 347- 3. at Milan,
348. 4. at Sirmium, 350. 5. at Sirmium, 351.
Petavius seems to stand alone in assigning to the Council of Con-
stantinople, 336, his first condemnation,
12.
Hilary calls it by the above title, de Syn. 11. vid. also Soz. iv.
p. 554. He seems also to mean it by the blasphemia Ursacii et
Valentis, contr. Const. 26.
This Confession was the first overt act of disunion between Arians
and Semi-Arians.
Sirmond, de Marca and Valesius (in Socr. ii. 30.), after Phaeba-
dius, think it put forth by a Council ; rather, at a Conference of a
few leading Arians about Constantius, who seems to have been pre-
sent e. g. Ursacius, Valens, and Germinius, Soz.iv. 1 2. Vid. also Hil.
;
Fragm. vi. 7-
It was written in Latin, Socr. ii. 30. Potamius wrote very bar-
barous Latin, judging from the Tract ascribed to him in Dacher.
Spicileg. t. 3. p. 299, unless it be a translation from the Greek,
vid.
also Galland. Bibl. t. v. p. 96. Petavius thinks the Creed not written,
but merely subscribed by Potamius (de Trin. i. 9. § 8) and Constant,
(in Hil. p.1 155, note
f) that it was written by Ursacius, Valens,
and
Potamius. It is remarkable that the Greek in Athanasius is clearer
than the original.
This at first sight is the Creed which Liberius signed, because
ni
162 Sirmian Confessions.
"
perfidia Ariana," Fra<rm.
6.
Note S. Hilary speaks of the latter as
I. Blondel (Prim, dans I'Egflise, p. 484.), Larroquanus, &c. are of this
°^
opinion. And the Roman Bre^aary,
Ed. Yen. 1 482, and Ed. Par. 1 543,
COCJNC
in the Service for S. Eusebius of Rome, August 14, says that" Pope
Arim
AND Liberius consented to the Arian misbelief," Launnoi Ep. v. 9. c. 13.
Seleu. Auxilius says the same, ibid. vi. 14. Animadv. 5. n. 18. Petavius
that they made an attempt to recall the copies they had issued, and Note
even obtained an edict from the Emperor for tliis purpose, but witli- I-
°^
out avail. Socr. ii. 30 fin. Soz. iv. 6. p. 543. ,,
Athanasius, on the otlier hand, as we have seen, supr. p. 1 "23, relates ^^j^j/
this in substance of the third Confession of Sirmium, not of the and
" Selett
blasphemia" or second.
Tillemont follows Socrates and Sozomen ; considering that Basil's
influence with the Emperor enabled him now to insist on a retractation
of the " blasphemia." And he argues that Germinius in 3G6, being
suspected of orthodoxy, and obliged to make profession of heresy,
was referred by his party to the formulary of Ariminum, no notice
"
being taken of the blasphemia," wliich looks as if it were sup-
pressed ; whereas Germinius himself appeals to the third Sirmian,
which is a proof that it was not suppressed. Hil. Fragm. 15. Con-
stant in Hil. contr. Const. 26, though he does not adopt the opinion
himself, observes, that the charge brought against Basil, Soz. iv.
132, Hil. 1. c. by the Acacians of persuading the Africans against
the second Sirmian is an evidence of a great efi'ort on his part at a
time when he had the Court with him to suppress it. We have just
seen Basil uniting with the Gallic Bishops against it.
the Creed was determined which should be laid before the great
Councils which were assembling. Basil and Mark were the chief
Semi-Arians present, and in the event became committed to an almost
Arian Confession. Soz. iv. 16. p. 562. It was finally settled on the
Eve of Pentecost, and the dispute lasted till morning. Epiph. Hfer. 73.
22. Mark at length was chosen to draw it up, Soz. iv. 22. p. 573.
yet Valens so managed that Basil could not sign it without an ex-
It was written in Latin, Socr. ii. 30. Soz. iv. 17.
planation. p. 563.
Coustant, however, in Hil. p. 1152, note i, seems to consider this
dispute and Mark's confession to belong to the same date (May 22)
in the
foregoing year; but p. 1363, note b, to change his opinion.
Petavius, who, Animadv. in Epiph. p. 318, follows Socrates in con-
sidering that the second Sirmian is the Confession which the Arians
yields to the testi-
tried to suppress, nevertheless, de Trin. i. 9. § 8,
but the Eusebians, dissolving the Council of Seleucia, kept the Fathers
at Ariminum together through the summer and autumn. Alean-
while at Nice in Thrace they confirmed the third Sirmian, Socr. ii.
37. p- 141, Theod. Hist. ii. 16, with the additional proscription of
the word hypostasis ; apparently lest the Latins should by means of
" One in substance." This
it evade the condemnation of the Creed,
thus altered, was ultimately accepted at Ariminum ; and was con-
firmed in January 360 at Constantinople; Socr. ii. 41. p. 153, Soz.
iv. 24 init.
Liberius retrieved his fault on this occasion ; for, whatever was the
confession he had signed, he now refused his assent to the Arimi-
nian, and, if Socrates is to be trusted, was banished in consequence,
Socr. ii. 37. p. 140.
NOTE on page 147.
On the alleged Confession of Antlocli against Paid of
Samosata.
and S. Hilary speak from the statements of the Semi-Arians, without and
Selett.
having" seen the document which the latter had alleged, while S. Basil
who speaks for certain lived later. It must also be confessed, that
S. Hilary diflfers from the two other Fathers in the reason he gives
for the rejection of the word. There is, however, a further argument
urged against the testimony of the three Fathers of a different kind.
A Creed, containing- the word, is found in the acts of the Council of
Ephesus 431, purporting to be a Definition of faith "of the Nicene
Council, touching the Incarnation, and an Exposition against Paul
of Samosata." This Creed, which (it is supposed) is by mistake re-
ferred to the Nicene Council, is admitted as genuine by Baronius,
J. Forbes (Instr. Hist. Theol. i. 4. § 1), Le Moyne (Var". Sacr. t. 2.
p. 255), Wormius (Hist. Sabell. p. 1 16
—
119 vid. Routh, Rell. t. 2.
:
ovaLov Be.(o /cat /xcra tov awfj-aros, ctAA.' oi'^t Kara to awfxa bfxoovcnov tw
^ew. Now
to enter upon the use of the word b^jioovcnov, as applied
to the Holy Trinity, would be foreign to my subject; aiul to refer to
the testimony of the three Fathers, would be assuming the point at
issue but still th^-e are other external considerations besides, which
;
(1) And
the Fathers speak of it as a new term, i. e. in Creeds.
first
" To meet the
irreligion of the Arian heretics, the Fatliers framed
the new name Homoi'ision." August, in Joann. 97. n. 4 [p. 904
(^).T.]. He says that it was misunderstood at Ariminum "propter
novitatem verbi'' (contr. Maxim, ii. 3), thougli it was the legitimate
" " an ancient
offspring of the ancient faith." Vigilius also says,
166 Alleged Confession of Antioch
Note subject received the new name Hoinoiision." Disp. Ath. et Ar. t. v.
l^- p. 695. (the paging wrong.) Bibl. P. Col. 1618. [Bibl. Max. Vet.
CouNc P^tr. 8. 757 fill.] vid.
Le Moyne. Var. Sacr. 1. c.
(2) Next Sozomen informs us, Hist. iv. 15. (as we have
Arim. seen
AND above, p. 162.) that the Creed against Paul was used by the Semi-
^^^^^^- Arians at Sirmium, A.D. 358, in order to the composition of the
Confession, which Liberius signed. Certainly then, if this be so,
we
cannot suspect it of containing the bixoovaiov.
(3) Again, we have the evidence of tlie Semi-Arians themselves
to
the same point in the documents which Epiphanius has preserved,
Hrer. 73. They there appeal to the Council against Paul as an
authority for the use of the word ovaia, and thereby to justify their
own oixoiovaiov ; which they would hardly have done, if that Council
had sanctioned the ojhoovctlov as well as ovcria. But moi'eover, as we
have seen, supr. p. 162, the last Canon of their Council of Ancyra
if so, with
actually pronounced anathema upon the o/Aoot'cnov; but
what face could they appeal to a Council which made profession
of it ?
Nay further, in Joann. t. 20. 16. Origen goes so far as to object Notb
to the phrase Ik t^s ovaias rov Trarpos yeyefVYJaOat rov vlov, but still
"•
a °^
assig-ninsr the reason that such a phrase introduced the notion of f, ^
Metwcrts, or the like corporeal notions, into our idea oi Oroa. Ahim.
It is scarcely necessary to add, that there was no more frequent ^nd
that Seleu.
charge against the oy-oovmov in the mouths of the Arians, than
it involved the Gnostic and Manichsean doctrine of materiality in the
and if so, of iiecessity there are three substances, &c." supr. § 45.
and also, according to Hilary's testimony " Homoiision Samosatenus
confessus est ; sed nunquid melius Ariani negaverunt ?" de Syn. 86.
2. The Creed also says, /Ltera t^s ^eoTiyros wv Kara adpKa ofJLoova-LO<s
rjfuv.
There are strong reasons for saying that the phrase ofxoova-Lo^ rjixiv
is of a date far later than the Council of Antioch.
(1) Waterland considers the omission of the phrase in the Athan-
asian Creed as an argument that it was written not lower than "Euty-
" "
chian times," A.I). 451. A
tenet," he observes of it, ex])ressly
held by some of the ecclesiastical writers before Eutyches's time, but
seldom or never omitted in the Creeds or Confessions about that time,
or after. To be convinced," he i)roceeds, " of the truth of this ....
article, one need but look into the Creeds and Formularies of those
168 Alleged Confession of Antioch
Note times, viz. into that of Turribius of Spain in 44', of Flavian of Con-
stantinople, as also of Pope Leo in 449, of the Chalcedon Council in
II.
°^ 451 of Pope Felix III, in 485, and Anastasius II, in 496, and of the
,
Arim Church of Alexandria in the same year ; as also into those of Pope
AND Hormisdas, and the Churches of Syria, and Fulgentius, and the Em-
Seleu. peror Justinian, and Pope John II, and Pope Pelagius I, within the
6th century. In all which we shall find either express denial of one
nature, or express affirmation of two natures, or the doctrine of
ChrisVsconsiihstantudity ?(•///* ?;s, or all three together, though they
are all omitted in the Athanasian Creed." vol. iv. p. 247-
(2) The very fact of Eut}'ches denying it seems to shew that the
phrase was not familiar, or at least generally received, in the Church
before.
" to this day," he says in the CouncU of Constantinople,
Up
" I have never said that the
A.D. 448, Bodyof our Lord and God
was consubstantial with us, but I confess tliatthe Holy Virgin was
consubstantial with us, and that our God was incarnate of her." Cone,
t. 2. p. 164, 5. [Harduin ; t. 4. 1013 fin. ed. Col.] The point at
issue, as in otlier controversies, seems to have been the reception or
rejection of a phrase, which on the one hand was as yet but in local
or private use, and on the other was well adapted to exclude the
nascent heresy. The Eutychians denied in like manner the word
(fivais, w'hich, it must be confessed, was seldom used till their date,
when the doctrine it expressed came into dispute. And so of the
phrase ofxoova-iov t^ Trarpl, and of vTrocTTacrts ; \nd. Note, supr. p. 7L
Now the phrase " consubstantial with us " seems to have been in-
troduced at the time of the Apollinarian controversy, and was natu-
rally the Catholic counter-statement to the doctrine of Apollinaris
that Christ's body was " consubstantial to the Godhead ;" a doctrine
which, as Athanasius tells us,ad Epict. 2, was new to the world when
the ApoUinarians brought it forward, and, according to Epiphanins,
was soon abandoned by them, Haer. 77» 25. It is natural then to
suppose that tiie antagonist phrase, which is here in question, came
into use at that date, and continued or was dropped according to the
Bibl. p. 789. Proclus, A.D. 434, uses the word 6iJi6(f>vXov, and still Note
with " the Virgin." tw irarpl Kara ttjv OeoTqra bfxoovcrLO^, orrcos 6 auros II.
KOI TYJ irapOivia Kara t^v adpKa 6/xo</)iiXos. ad Arm. p. 618, circ. init.
ON
COUNC.
vid. also p. 613 fin. p. 618. He uses the word ofx-oovcnov frequently Arim.
of the Divine Nature as above, j'et this does not sugo^est the other AND
use of it. Another term is used by Athanasius, tov rjvwfxevov Tvarpl Seleu^
Kara Trvevfj-a, rjfuv 8e Kara aapKa. apud Theod. Eranist. ii. p. 139.
Or again that He took flesh of Mary, e.g. ovk ck Mapias aXX' Ik t^s
iavTov ovcria's crw/xa. ad Epict. 2. Or roVetos avdpunro<;, e.g. Procl.
ad Arm. p. 613. which, though Apollinaris denied, Eutjehes allowed,
Concil. t. 2. p. 15/. Leon. Ep. 21.
However, S. Eustathius (A.D. 325.) says that our Lord's soul was
Tttis if/v)(aL^ Twv d.v6pu}Tro)v 6fJLOovaio<;, wavep koX tj crapf 6/xoovcrtos tt^
TtiivavOpwTTwv aapKL. ap. Theod. Eranist. i. p. 56. vid. also Leont.
contr. Nestor, et Eutych. p. 9/7- and S. Ambrose, ibid. Dial. ii. p.
139. o/xoovcTLov T(o TTttTpt Kara rr/j/ OeoTTjra, koI o/JLOovaiov rjplv Kara ttjv
but the genuineness of the whole extract is extremely
dvOpoiTTOTrjra,
doubtful, Benedictines almost grant, t. 2. p. 729.
as indeed the
Waterland, Athan. Creed, ch. 7- p. 254. seems to think the internal
evidence strong against its genuineness, but yields to the external ;
and Coustant (App, Epist. Pont. Rom. p. 79) considers Leontius a
different author from the lieontius de Sectis, on account of his mis-
takes. Another instance is found in Theophilus ap. Theod. Eranist.
ii.
p. 154.
becomes stronger still when we turn to documents
Tills contrast
of the alleged date of the Confession. A
letter of one of the Coun-
cils 263 —
270, or of some of its Bishops, is still extant, and exliibits
a very difi'erent phraseology. Instead of bjxoovcno<; rjfuv we find the
"
vaguer expressions, not unlike Athanasius, &.c. of the Son being
made flesh and made man," and " the Body from the Virgin," and
" man of the seed of "
David," and partaking of flesh and blood."
Routli Rell. t. 2. p. 473. And the use of the word oiaia is different ;
and derivatives are taken to convey the idea, neither of the divine
its
nature of our Lord, nor the human, but of the divine nature sub-
stantiated or become a substance, world almost as if
in the material :
yevos. And so nuich was the former its meaning in the earlier times,
that
Hippolytus j)hiinly denies that men are one substance one with
another ; for he asUs, fjirj TravTcs ev o-wyxa iafjuv Kara t^v ovcriav; contr.
Noet. 7. And this moreover altogether agrees with what was said
170 Alleged Confession of Antioch
Note above, that in Paul's argument ag-ainst the ofj.oovo-tov irarpX the word
n. oucrta was taken (and rightly) in what Aristotle as Anastasius
°^ (Hodeg.
6. p. 96), and Theorian
(Leg. p. 441), after him, assigns as the proper
Arim. sense of the word, viz. an individual, and not a common nature.
AND
Seleu. 3. The Creed
also speaks of our Lord as ev TTpoa-umov o-vvOerov e/c
ovpaviov kol dv^pojTretas crapKos.
ueorrjTO'i
Now the word o-vvOctov, in the Latin compositum, is found in the
fragment of Malchion's disputation in the Council. Routh Rell. t. 2.
p. 4/6. But Trpoa-wnrov and avvOeTov irp6(T0JTrov seem to me of a later
date.
The wordpersona, applied to our Lord in His two natures and
in contrast with them, is to he found in Tertull. contr. Prax. 27.
Though, however, it was not absolutely unknown to ecclesiastical
authors, this is a very rare instance of its early occurrence.
We also find Novatian de Trin, 21. speaking of the " regula circa
Personam Christi;" and considering his great resemblance to Ter-
tuUian, be supposed that persona here denotes, not merely
it
may
our Lord's subsistence in the Holy Trinity, but in His two natures.
But on the other hand, he uses Christus absolutely for the Second
Person all through his Treatise, e. g. 9. init. " Regula veritatis docet
nos credere post patron etiam in Filium Dei Christum Jesum,
Dominum Deum nostrum, sed Dei filium, &c." Again, " Christus
habetgloriam ante mundi institutionem." 16. vid. also 13.. where he
speaks of Christ being made flesh, as if the name were synonymous
"
with " Word in the text, John i. 14. And, moreover, subsequently
to "persona Christi," he goes on to
speak of "seamf/am personam
post PatremJ'^ 26 and 31. vid. also 27.
However, in spite of these instances, one might seem to say con-
fidently, if a negative can be proved, that it was not in common use
at soonest before the middle of the fourth
century, and perhaps not
till much later.
Epp. 2 and 3 nor among tlie testimonies of the Fathers cited at the
;
&c. Hter. iii. 16. n. 5. 6 [p. 267 O.T]. tmus quidem et idem existens, ON
COUNC.
n. 7. per multa dividens Filium Dei. ii. 8. mtum et eiindem, ibid. Si
Arim.
alter. alter, .
quoniam unttm euni novit Apostolus, &.c.
. . .n. 9.
. The AND
passage upon the subject is extended to c. xxiv. Seleu.
S. Ambrose —
Unus in utraque [divinitate et carne] loquitur Dei
:
uno semper loquitur modo. de fid. ii. 9. vid. 58. Non divisus sed
n)ius ; quia utrumque ruius, et unus in utroque non enim alter . . .
Trinity.
S. Hilary —
Non alius filius hominis quara qui filius Dei est neque
:
alius in forma Dei quam qui in forma servi perfectus homo natus
est ... habens in se et totum verumque quod homo est, et totura
; .
verumque quod Deus est. de Trin. x. 19. Cum ipse ille filius hominis
ipse sit (pii et filius Dei, quia totus hominis filius totus Dei filius
sit, &c. Natus autem est, non ut esset alius atque alius, sed ut
. . .
vid. also 11, 14, 21, and 24. duos Christos unum, alium. Pam- . . .
])hil. Apol. ap. Routh, Rell. t. 4. p. 320. 6 avT6<; Icttlv del Trpos kavrov
(ocraiTws €;^wj/ Greg. Nyss. t. 2. ]). 696. eva koI tov avTov. Greg. Naz.
Ep. 101. p. 85. aXXo fxlv Koi aXXo to. c^ wv 6 2um^p. ovk dXXos Se kol
aAXos. p. 86.
Vid. also Athan. contr. Apollin. i. 10 fin. 11 fin. 13e. 16b.ii. 1 init.
5 e. 12 e. 18. circ. fin. Tiieoph. Alex, apud Theod. Eranist. ii. p. 154.
Hilar, ibid. p. 162. Attic, ibid. p. 167- Jerom. in Joan. leros. 35.
A correspondin<!f pbraseobigy and cnnission of the term "person"
is found in the undoubted Epistle of (he Antiocheue Fathers to Ik ;
172 Alleged Confession of Antioch
Note ttolv to
Trjs irapOivov(raijLta -^{upriGav irX-qpioiJia t^s OeoTrp-o's o'W/i.aTiKws,
!!•
TTJ OeoTTjTi drpeVTojs rjvwraL Kai TeOeoTroiyjTai' ov X^-P^^ ^ avros ^eos Kai
°^
avOpurn-os k. t. A. Routh, Rell. t. 2. p. 473. oltw Kat 6 Xptcrros Tpo t^s
A o^apKojo'ecos ws ets i)iVop.acnai.
Kat/o Ji-piaros ev Kat to avTO wv tt) owo'ta.
^xD ibid. p. 474. €t aAXo p-iv . . oAAo 8e . . . Svo viovs. ibid. p. 485. And
Seleu . so Malchion, Unus factiis est , . . imitate subsistens, &,c. ibid. p.
476.
(3) It indisputable too that the word Trpoo-wTrov is
is from time
to time used of our Lord by the early writers in its ordinary vagiie
sense, which is inconceivable if it were already received in creeds as
an ecclesiastical symbol.
E. g. S. Clement calls the Son the "person" or countenance,
"
TTpoo-wTTov, of the Father." Strom, v. 6. p. 665. and Peedag-. i. 7'
p. 132. vid. also Strom, vii. 10. p. 886. And so iv Trpoo-oj-o) Trarpo?,
Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 22 (vid. supr. p. 114, note d). and even Cyril
Alex. Dial. v. p. 554. Vid. also Cyril. Catech. xii. 14 fin. bp-oioirpo-
crwTTov. Chrysostom speaks of 8uo TTpoawwa, i. e. human and divine,
S. Clement above exemplify, on the whole ceased with the rise of Note
the Sabellian controversy and the adoption of the word (as in Hippol. II.
^jf'j,'
linarian forgery; it too uses the word "persona" of the union of
Seleu. natures in our Jjord. And for a fifth to the Serm. in S. Thoniam,
which is 6th General Council as S. Chrysostom's, but
quoted by tlie
that some of the Samosatenes so interpreted Acts x. 36, as if the Word Note
was sent to " preach peace through Jesus Christ." As far as the frag- ^^*
ments of the Antiochene Acts state or imply, he taught more or less, Cqunc
as follows :
—
that the Son's pre-existence was only in the divine fore- Arim.
knowledge, Routh Rell. t. 2. p. 466. tliat to hold His substantial pre- and
existence was to hold two Gods, ibid. p. 467. that He was, if not an Seleu.
instrument, an impersonal attribute, p. 469. that His manhood was not
"unalterably made one with the Godhead," p. 473. "that the Word
and Christ were not one and the same," p. 474. that Wisdom was in
Christ as in the prophets, only more abundantly, as in a temple that
;
man, the latter a mere man only till He was united to the Word. And
Marius Mercator says, "Nestorius circa Verbum Dei, «o» ut Pauhis
sentit, qui non substantivuni sed prolatitium potentife l>ei efficax
Verbum esse definit." p. 50. Ibas, and Theodore of Mopsuestia,
though more suspicious witnesses, say the same, vTd. Facund. vi. 3. iii.
2. and Leontius de Scctis, iii.
p. 504.
1 76 Alleged Confession ofAntioch against Paul of Samosata.
DISCOUESE I.
CHAP. I.
IXTRODUCTIOX.
Reason writing certain persons indifferent about Arianism ; Arians not
for ;
1 . Of all other heresies whicli have departed from the truth Chap.
it is
^
acknowledged, that they have but devised a madness ^,
—j—^—
*
^
and their irreligiousness has long since become notorious i
p; 2,
"o^e e;
to all For, that** their authors went out from us, it
men.
.
p. 91
plainly follows, as the blessed John has written, that they note q.
"
never thoug-ht nor now think with us. Wherefore, as saith P- 1>
note a.
the Saviour, in that they gather not with us, they scatter with
the devil, and keep an eye on those who slumber, that, by
sowing of their own mortal poison, they may
^
this second ^
p. 5,
^^^^
have companions in death. But, whereas one heresy and
that the last, which has now risen as harbinger"* of Antichrist
"*
P- ^^»
'
note q.
°
This is ahnost a tech-
i-Kivoricracrat. but whatfrom the bep^'inning'tlie Eccle-
nical word, and has occurred again siasticalTraditionAecXaxeA." Hist.iii.
and again already, as descriptive of 7. The sense of the word iirlvoia which
heretical teaching in opposition to the will come into consideration below, is
received traditionary doctrine. It is akin to this, being the view taken by
also found passim in others writers, the mind of an object independent of
Thus Socrates, speaking ot the decree (wlietlier or not correspondent to) the
of the Council of Alexandria, 'M2, object itself.
^
against A pollinaris; "for not originat- rbyap e^(\6f7v .... SrjKoy hv ftrj,
ing, €V(i'orj(Ta'''''6s, any «oi'<?/ devotion, i. e. to; and so infr. §.43. tJ) Se koX
did they introduce it into the Churcii, TrpocTKwuffQai. .... Sf/Ao;/ ^lv e'trj.
N
178 Avians, unlihe former liereiics, ajppeal to Scripture.
—
back into the Church's paradise, that with the pretence of
Christianity, her smooth sophistry (for reason she has none)
may deceive men into wrong thoughts of Christ, nay, since
—
she hath already seduced certain of the foolish, not onh^ to
corrupt their ears, but even to take and eat with Eve, till in
their ignorance which ensues they think bitter sweet, and
admire this loathsome heresy, on this account I have thought
Job 41, it necessary, at your request, to unrip the folds of its hreast-
4. Sept.
plate, and to shew the
ill-savour of its folly. So while those
who are far from it, may continue to shun it, those whom it
has deceived may repent ; and, opening the eyes of their
heart, may understand that darkness is not light, nor false-
hood truth, nor Arianism good ; nay, that those who call "^
"
vid. infr. § 4 fin. That heresies providing themselves with words of
before the Arian appealed to Scripture craft, they used to go about, &c. ire-
•welearnfroraTertullian,dePr£escr.42. piripxovTo." vid. supr. p. 22. note y.
who warns CathoHcs against indul- Also &vo}Ka] KOLTw TT^pttpfpovTes, de deer.
ging themselves in their own view of § 13. TO) pTjTWTfBpvW-qKafft ra. Travra-
isolated texts against the voice of the Xoi;.0rat.2. § 18 [\i.307].Tbno\vepv\.
Catholic Church, vid. also A'incentius, XrjTov (T6<pL<Tjj.a, Basil, contr. Eunom.
who specifies obiter Sabellius and No- ii. 14. T7)^ woKvdpvWriTov Sia\eKTiKr}v,
vatian. Commonit. 2. Still Arianism Nyssen. contr. Eun. iii. p. 125. Trjy
was contrasted with other heresies on Bpv\\ovfi4v7}v a.Troppo7]v. Cyril. Dial. iv.
this point, as in these two respects ; p.505. Ti}VTro\v6piiWr]Tov ipd'vrjv.SoCT.
(1.) thcyappealedto a secret tradition, ii. 4.3.
tles, as the Gnostics, Iren. Hser. iii. 1 written to shew the vital importance
[p. 205 O.T.], or they professed a gift of the point in controversy, and the
of prophecy introducing fresh revela- unchristian character of the heresy,
tions, as Montanists, supr. p. 78. and without reference to the word 6fxoov.
Manichees, Aug. contr. Faust, xxxii.6. (Tiou. He has insisted in the works
(2.) The Arians availed themselves of above translated, p. 130. ref. 2. that
certain texts as objections, argued the enforcement of the symbol was
keenly and plausibly from them, and but the rejection of the heresy, and
would not be driven from theni. Orat. accordingly he is here content to bring
ii. § 18. c. Epiph. Haer. 69. 15. Or rather out the Catholic sense, as feeling that,
they took some ^\ords of Scripture, if persons understood and embraced
and made their own deductions from it, they would not scruple at the
"
them viz.
; Son," "made," -'exalted," word. He
seenis to allude to what
&c. " Making their private irrehgious- may be the liberal or indif-
called
ness as if a rule, they misinterpret all ferent feeling as swaying the per-
the divine oracles by it." Orat. i. § 52 son for whom
he writes, also infr. §
[infra p. 256]. vid. also Epiph. Hser. 76. 7 fin. § 9. § 10 init. § 15 fin. § 17.
6 fin. Hence we hear so much of their § 21. § 23. He mentions in Apollin.
6pv\\r]Tal (paival.Xe^eis, ein], ^rjTo, say- i. 6. one Rhetorius, who was an
Egyp-
ings in general circulation, which were tian, whose opinion, he says, it was
" fearful to mention." S.
commonly founded on some particular Augustine
text. e.g. infr. § 22 [p. 213] "amply tells us that this man taught tliat " all
Arians for Chnst follow Anus. 179
to say that they who asked Barabbas instead of the Saviour 41 § 27, ;
heresies were in the right path, and call us Homoiisians, as Donatists Ma-
" " is
spoke trutli," which," he adds, carians, as Manichees Pharisees, and
so absurd as to seem to me incredible." as theother heretics use various titles."
Hier. 72. vid. also Philastr. Hter. 91. Op. imp. i. 75. It may be added tliat
^
He seems to alhide to Catholics tiie heretical name adheres, the Cath-
being- called Atiianasians; vid. however olic dies away. S. Ciirysostom draws ^
p. 181, ref. 1. Two distinctions are a second distinction, " Are we divided
drawn between such a title as applied from the Church have we heresi-
?
of Christum ? f<!r you are not called in One Holy Catholic Church,' that
Christian but Marcionite. M. And you thou mayest avoid their wretched
arecalledof theCathohcChurch; there- meetings and ever abide with the
;
fore ye are not Christians either. A. Holy Church Catholic, in which thou
Did we profess man's name, you would wast regenerated. And if ever thou
liave spoken to the point ; but if we are art sojiiurning in any city, inquire not
called from being all over the world, simply where the Lord's House is, (for
what is there bad in this?" Adamant. the sects of the profane also make an
as uther liei'etics after their leaders, 181
who went out with Arius, left the Saviour's Name to us who
were with Alexander, and as to them they were henceforward
denominated Arians. Behold then, after Alexander's death
too, those who communicate with his successor Athanasius,
and those with whom the said Athanasius communicates,
are instances of the same rule; none of them bear his
name nor is he named from them, but all in like manner, yid.
^,
i
crafty one did not escape detection ; but, for all his many
a man, make Thyself God, and sayest, I and the Father are 33.
one ? And
so too, this counterfeit and Sotadean Arius, feigns p. 178, 1
note c.
to speak of God, introducing Scripture language ^, but is on
'
It is very difficult to gain a clear lost.'" Harduin. Cone. t. i. p. 457.
idea of the character of Arius. Atha- Perhaps this strange account may be
nasius speaks as if his Thalia was but taken to illustrate the words " mania"
a token of his personal laxity, and cer- and"Ario-nianiacs." S.Alexander too
tainly the mere fact of his having' speaks of Arius's melancholic tempera-
written it seems incompatible with
any ment, fj.i\ayxoKi.Ko1s 7)pfj.offiJ.4vrjs 5o'|t)s
remarkable seriousness and strictness. Kevris. Theod. Hist. i. 3. p. 741. S. Ba-
Yet Constantineand Epiphanius speak sil also speaks of the Eiinomians as eis
ing, and all that is miserable, and Athanasius, on the other hand, would
fearfully emaciated. How hateful to appear to have been short, if we may
see, and filthy is his mass of hair, how so interpret Julian's indignant descrip-
he is half dead
over, with failing
all tion of him, yU7j5e avrjp, dA.A' avdotciri-
" not even a
eyes, and bloodless countenance, and (TKos fvreKris, man, but
woe-begone so that all these things
! a common little fellow." Ep. 51. Yet
comt)ining in him at once, frenzy, S. Gregory Nazianzen speaks of him
madness, and folly, for the counten- as " high in prowess, and humble in
ance of the complaint, have made thee spirit, mild, meek, full of sympathy,
wild and savage. But not having any l)leasant in speech, more pleasant in
sense, what bad plight he is in, he manners, (ni!(e/ictil in person, more
cries out, ' I am transported with de- angelical in mind, serene in his re-
light, and I leap and skip for joy, and bukes, instructive in his praises," &c.
I fly:' and again, with Itoyisli impet- &c. Orat. 21.9.
uosity,
'
Be it so,' he says, '
we are
184 Arianism an Atheism,
the faith delivered [in the Holy Anti-pope, on account of his cruelties,
'•
this second Arius, the more copio is
Trinity] is one, and this imites us to
God, and he who takes ought from the river of the atheistic spring, t'js aBhv
Trinity, and is baptized in the sole irriyris." Orat. 25. 11. Palladlus, the
Name of the Father or of the Son, or Imperial officer, is avrip &deos. ibid. 12.
CHAP. II.
Arius maintains tliat God became a Fatlier, and the Son was not always ;
tlie Son out of notliing ; once He was not He was not before His gene-
;
ration ; He was created; named Wisdom and Word after God's attributes ;
made that He miglit make us one out of many powers of God alterable ;
; ;
a Father;" buf
once God w^as alone and not yet a Father, ^
^^^
" The Son was not
but afterwards He became a Father."
"
always ; for, whereas all things were made out of nothing,
and all existing creatures and works were made, so the
Word of God Himself was " made out of nothing," and
" once He was " He was not before His
not," and genera-
tion," but He as others "had an origin of creation." "For
"
God," he says, was alone, and the Word as yet was not,
nor the Wisdom. Then, wishing to frame us, thereupon He
made a certain one, and named Him Word and Wisdom
and Son, that He might form us by means of Him."
Accordingly, he says that there are two wisdoms, fii'st.
186 Anus's Thalia
"
very God," but by participation of grace. He, as others,
is God only in name." And, whereas all
beings are foreign
and different from God in substance, so too is " the Word
alien and unlike in all things to the Father's substance and
in conipreliensiou% but "He knows not even His own sub- chap.
was originally a Stoical word, and even that He was in the Father, i.e. the doc-
when considered perfect, was, properly trine of the irepix'^p'jTiJ. p. 95, note d.
speaking, attributable only to
an imper- or to maintain that He was a distinct,
feet being. For it is used in contrast and therefore a created, being. On the
to the Platonic doctrine of '(Seat, to ex- other hand Scriptiu'e asserts that, as
obtained by the Holy Spirit which is in God,
press the liold of things " searcheth ail
the mind through the senses ; it being things, yea, the deep
a Stoical maxim, nihil esse in intellectu things of God," so the Son, as being
quod non fuerit prius in sensu. In this "
"in the bosom of the Father," alone
sense it is also used by the Fathers, to hath declared Him." vid. Clement,
mean real and certain knowledge after Strom, v. 12. And thus Athan. speak-
" If the Son is in
inquiry, though it is also
ascribed to ing of Mark xiii. ,'52,
the and the Father in the Son,
Almighty (iod. As to the position of Father,
Arius, since we are told in Scripture
and the Father knows the day and
" knoweth the
that none things of a the hour, it is plain that the Son too,
man save the spirit of man which is being in the Father, aud knowing the
in him," if KardXri^is be an exact and things in the Father, Himself also
of knows the day and the hoiu-." Orat.
complete knowledge of the object
contemplation, to deny that
the Son iii. 44 [infra p. 463].
188 A CuitnclVs decision suffijcleiit, even without argument.
''
And so Vigilius of the heresies hseretici sunt pronunciati, orthodoxo-
about the Incarnation, Etiamsi in er- rumsecuritatisufficeret.contr.Eutych.
roris eorum destructionem nulli conde- i.
p. 494.
rentur libri, hoe ipsum solum, quod.
CHAP. III.
The Arians affect Scripture language, but their doctrine new, as well as
unscriptural. Statement of the Catholic doctrine, that the Son is proper
to the Father's substance, and eternal. Restatement of Arianism in
contrast, that He is a creature with a beginning : the controversy comes
to this issue, whether one whom we are to believe in as God, can be so
in name only, and is merely a creature. What pretence then for being
indifferent in the controversy ? The Arians rely on state patronage, and
dare not avow their tenets.
'
Faustus, in August, contr. Faust, cumcision, baptism, temptation, &c.
ii. admits the Gospels, (vid. Beau-
1. ibid, xxxii. 6.
sobre Manich. t. i. p. 291, &c.) but All heresies seem connected to-
'"
denies that they were written by the gether and to run into each other,
reputed authors, ibid, xxxii. 2. but When the mind has embraced one, it
Disc, does but pretend to For how can lie speak truth con-
'— cerning the Father^
it.
heresy
God was but one Person, and that in temper, so in certain primary prin-
Christ was a creature, supr. p. 41, note ciples. And, lastly, the Truth only is
e. Apollhiaris was betrayed into his a real doctrine, and therefore stable ;
heresy by opposing- the Arians, yet liis every thing false is of a transitory na-
heresy started with the tenet in wliich ture and has no stay, like reflections
the Arians ended, that Christ had no in a stream, one opinion continually
human soul. His disciples became, and passing into another, and creations
even naturally, some of them Sabel- being but the first stages of dissolu-
lians, some Arians. Again, beginning tion. Hence so much is said in the
Avith denying our Lord a soul, he came Fathers of orthodoxy being a narrow
to deny Hiuiabody,like the Manichees way. Thus S. Gregory speaks of the
and DocetiE. Tlie same passages from middle and " royal" way. Orat. 32. 6.
Athanasius will be found to refute both also Damasc. contr. Jacob, t. 1. p. 398.
Eutychians and Nestorians, though vid. also Leon. Ep. 85. 1. p. 1051.
Ep.
diametrically opposed to each other : 129. p. 1254. " levissima adjectione
and these ag-reed together, not only in corrumpitur." also Serm. 25. I.
p. 83.
considering nature and person identi- also Mgil. in Eutycli. i. init. Quasi
cal, but, strange to say, in holding, inter duos latrones crucifigitur Domi-
and the Apollinarians too, that our nus, &c. Novat. Trin.30. vid. the pro-
Lord's manhood existed before its " Thine ears shall
mise, hear a word
union with Him, which is the special behind thee, saying. This is the way,
heresy of Nestorius. Again, the Nes- walk ye in it, tvhen ye turn to the right
torians were closely connected with hand, and ivhen ye turn to the left."
the Sabellians and Samosatenes, and Is. XXX. 21.
=
the latter with the Photinians and SciipoSoKot. and so Kfpdos ttis (ptKo.
modern Socinians. And the Nestorians XpvtJ-aTias, infr. § 53. He mentions
were connected with the Pelagians ; irpocTTacTias (piXuv, % 10. And so S.
and Aerius, who denied Episcopocy Hilary speaks of the exemptions from
and prayers for the dead, with the taxes which Constantius granted the
Arians and his opponent the Semi- " You
;
Clergy as a bribe to Arianize ;
arian Eustathius with the Encratites. concede taxes as Csesar, thereby to
One reason of course of this peculiarity invite Christians to a denial ; you
of heresy is, that when the mind is remit what is yoiu* own, that we may
once unsettled, it may fall into any lose what is God's." contr. Const. 10.
eiTor. Another is that it /*• heresy all; And again, of resisting Constantius
heresies being secretly connected, as as hosteni blandientem, qui non dorsa
Whatcomes notfrom the father sis oftlieioredictedAioostasy.
191
work ••?" But if they themselves own that they have heard it ^*^^i""-
now for the first time, how can they deny that this heresy is p. 84.
"
but that of which the blessed Paul has foretold, that in the ^o'^'^''^-
bocrat.
latter times some shall depart from the so und^ faith, giving'i. 6.
heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils, in the hy- Tim.4, |
the other hand, Ep. iEg. 22. Athan. Haer. 27.5. Of the\'alentinians, Epiph.
contrasts the Arians with the Mele- Hser. 31. 34. Of the Montanists and
tians, as not influenced by secular others, ibid. 48. 8. Of the Saturnilians
views. But it is obvious that there (according to Huet.) Origen in IMatt.
were, as was natural, two classes of xiv. 16. Of apostolic heretics, Cyril. Cat.
men in the heretical party the fana-
;
— iv. 27. Of Marcionites, Valentinians,
tical class who began the heresy and and Manichees, Chrysost. de Vng. 5.
were its real life, such as Arius, and Of Gnostics and Manichees, Theod.
afterwards the ^nomoeans, in whom Haer. ii. prsef. Of Encratites, ibid. v.
misbelief was a "mania;" and the Eu- fin. Of Eutyches,Ep.Anon.
19U.(apud
sebians, who cared little for a theory of Garner. Diss. v. Theod. p. 901 .) Pseu-
doctriiie or consistency of profession, do-Justin seems to consider it fulfilled
compared with their own aggrandize- in the Catholics of the fifth century, as
ment. With these must be counted being Anti-pelagians. Qu;est. 22. vid.
numbers, who conformed to Arianism Bened. note in loc. Besides Athanasius,
lest they should suffer temporal loss. no early author occurs to the writer of
vid. p. 3, note f. fin. This consider- by whom it is referred to the
"*
this,
ation, as might be expected, is insisted Arians, except S.Alexander's Letter
on by the Fathers, vid. Cyril. Dial. iv. ap. Socr i. G. and, if he may hazard the
p. 511, &c. V. p. 566. Greg. Naz. 40. conjecture, there is much in that letter
42 Hil. Trin. viii. 28 ; Ambros. de fid.
;
like Athan. 's own writing.
i. n. 69 and 104.
192 Contrast between Scripture doctrine and Avian.
Disc. He Said, I said ye are Gods, had this grace from the Father,
'• ^
dp Deer -WW
only by participation of the Word, through — the Spirit.
"
For
§ 14 fin.;'
He is the
expression of the Father^s Perso??, and Light from
Light,and Power, and very Lmage of the Father's substance.
de^Syn.
§! 151. For Lord has said, Re that hath seen Me, hath
this too the
Joba 14, seen the Father. And He ever was and is, and nevet was
not. For the Father being everlasting, His AVord and His
2
p. 25, Wisdom must be everlastinsf 2.
note c.
o r\ i t
6. On the other hand, what have these
1 1
persons to shew
us from the infamous Thalia ? Or, first of all, let them
study
it themselves, and
copy the tone of the writer at least the ;
to ex]3lain themselves. For what can they say from it, but
that " God was not always a Father, but became so after-
wards the Son was not always, for He was not before His
;
—
determined^ what is fitting to say, He was, or He was not ; Chap.
always, or before His birth ; eternal, or from this and from ^^j'
then ; true, or by adoption, and from participation and in
j^iVoiaf,
idea^; to call Him one of things generated, or to unite Him "«!•
...
^
proofs from Scriptui-e will be cast at them from every side, note g.
feeding their so-called lamp from the wild olive, and fearing
lest it should soon be quenched, (for it is said, the light of job 18,
the ivicJied shall be put out,) they hide it under the bushel ^ of ^-
their hypocrisy, and make a different profession, and boast of is.
them may be kept from seeing how foul their heresy is. note c!
words ? or from whom have they received what they venture § 22.
to say ^? Not any one man can they specify who has supplied 'J^^^']
194 Arianism not in Scnjpture, hut from Satan.
—
that, the Lord aiding us, and the enemy,
;
put to shame, when they see him without resource who sow-
ed this heresy in them, and may learn though late, that, as
2
p. 179, being Arians, they are not Christians
ref. 4.
CHAP. IV.
heathen rage, and imagine vain words against the Lord and
»
Athan. observes that this formula ever, that it was the Fatherwho "was"
of the Arians is a mere evasion to before the Son ? This was true, if
escape using the word "time." vid. "before" was taken, not to imply
also CjTil. Thesaur. iv. pp. 19, 20. time, but origination or beginning.
Else let themexplain, —
"There was," And in this sense the first verse of S.
u-7jrt<
" when the Son was not?" or John's Gospel may be interpreted "In
what was before the Son ? since He the Beginning," or Origin, i.e. in
Himself was before all times and ages, the Fatlier " was the Word." Thus
which He created (supr. p. 30, note n). Athan. liimself understands that text,
Thus, if "when" be a word of time, Orat. iv. § 1. vid. also Orat. iii. § 9 ;
Disc, against His Christ ? for no toly Scripture has used such
language of the Saviour, but rather "always^' and "eternal"
''
Johnl, 1. and co-existent always with the Father." For, In the he-
ginning ivas the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word loas God. And in the Apocalypse he ^ thus speaks ;
Apoc. 1, Wlio and who was and ivho is to come. Now who can
is
rdBe \iy f
'•
Our translation of the replied to it, vid. supr. p. 101, and
I.
is
signified. For after making mention of the creation, lie Chap.
alone, without the Son, to make God known, see that you
fall not into the further
opinion that without the Son it
came to be. But if through the Son it came to be, and
in Him all things consist, it must follow that he who con- Col. 1,
Word who framed it, and through Him begins to apprehend contr,
the Father ^. And if, as the Saviour also says. No one
Cfent.
hioweth the Father, save the Son, and he to whom the Son Matt. 11,
shall revealHim, and if on Philip^s asking. Shew us the 27-
hath seen Me, hath seen the Father, reasonably doth Paul,
while accusing the Greeks of contemplating the harmony
and order of the creation without reflecting on the Framing
Word (for the creatures witness to their own
within it ;
eternity of the Son ? for when did man see light without
' ^
supr.
pp. 20,
48. the brightness of its radiance, that he may say of the Son,
''
There was once, when He was not," or " Before His
generation He was not."
5. And the woi'ds addressed to the Son in the hundred
Ps. 145, and forty-fourth Psalm, Thy Idngdom is a Mngdom of all
13.
ages, forbid any one to imagine any interval at all in which
the Word did not exist. For if every interval is measui'ed
by ages, and of all the ages^ the Word is King and Maker,
therefore, whereas no interval at all exists prior to Him ^,
it were madness to say,
" There was once when the Ever-
«
Vid. p. 30, note n. The subject is Angels. This had been a philosophi-
treated at lengfth in Greg. Nyss. contr. cal distinction, Timseus says flKwi/ eVtj
Eunoni. i, t. 2. Append, 93 — 101. Tci> ayevvdrcf) \p6vcfi, hv alaii'a
de Fid. i. 8
vid. also Anibros. 11. As
p.
— Xpivos
TTorayopeiiofjies. vid. also Philoii. Quod
time measures the material creation, Deus immut. 6. Euseb. Laud. C. 1
"ages" were considered to measure prope fin., p. 501. Naz. Or. 38, 8.
the immaterial, as tlie duration of
Scripture uses "teas not before^' of creatures. 199
earth, and every herb of the field before it grew; for theLord God Chap.
had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not
a man to till the ground. And in Deuteronomy, When the Deut.
Most High divided to the nations. And the Lord said in His ff*. f*
Before I formed thee in the womb, I Jcnew thee. And David jer. 1, 5.
in the Psalm says. Before the mountains were brought forth, Ps. 90,2.
or ever the earth and the world were made. Thou, art God
God, that knowest the secrets; and hnowest all things before
they be. Thus it appears that the phrases '' once was not,^^
"
and before it came to be/' and '' when," and the like,
belong to things generate and creatures, which come out
of nothing, but are alien to the Word. But if such terms
are used in Scripture of things generate, but, "ever" of
the Word, it follows, ye God's enemies, that the Son
did not come out of nothing, nor is in the number of gene-
rated things at all, but is the Father's Image and Word
eternal, never having not been, but being ever, as the eter-
nal Radiance- of a Light which is eternal. Why imagine -p. 39,
"° ^ "
then times before the Son ? or wherefore blaspheme the
Word as after times, by whom even the ages wei'e made^? for 3p, 108,
how did time or age at all subsist when the Word, as you "ot^ h.
say, had not appeared, through whom all things were made John 1,
and ivithout whom not one thing was made ? Or why, when
you mean time, do you not plainly say, "a time was when the
Word was not ?" but you drop the word " time" to deceive
all conceal your own feeling,
the simple, why you do not at
nor, even you if did, could
you escape discovery. For you still
simply mean times, when you say, "There was when He was
" He was not before His
not," and generation."
CHAP. V.
SUBJECT CONTINUED.
Objection, that the Son's eternity malves Him co-ordinate with the Father,
introduces the subject of His Divine Sonsliip, as a second proof of His
eternity. The word Son is introduced in a secondary, but is to be under-
stood in real sense. Since ^11 tilings partake of the Father in partaking
of the Son, He is the whole participation of the Father, that is, He is the
Son by nature ;
for to be wholly participated is to beget.
Disc. ] . When
these points are thus proved, their profaneness
" If there never
goes further. was, when the Son was not/'
§14. " but He is and co-exists with the Father,
say they, eternal,
call Him no more the Father's Son, but brother '^.^ insen-
sate and contentious For if we said only that He was eter-
!
nally with the Father, and not His Son, their pretended
scruple would have some plausibility but if, while we say ;
account Them brothers, but the Father is the Origin of the Chap.
Son and begat Him and the Father is Father, and not ;
—
:
the Son of any and the Son is Son, and not brother.
;
out of nothing, they have but to prove it; and then they P- ^^»
note S«
are at liberty, as speculating about a creature, to cry out.
if
*>
In other words, by the Divine He has ever, therefore He is ever be-
yivvr}cn.s is notmeant an act but an eter- gotten. For it became Him, who is
nal and unchang'eable fact, in the Divine properly (/cupiais) the Son, ever to be
Essence. Arius, not admitting' this, deriving His existence from the F.ather,
objected at tlie outset of the contro- and not as we who derive its commence-
" ment only. In us generation is a way
versy to the phrase always Father,
always Son," Theod. Hist. i. 4. p. 749. to existence ; in the Son of God it
and Eunomius argues that, " if the Son denotes the existence itself; in Him
is co-eternal with the Father, the Father it has not existence for its end, but it
was never such in act, ivipyhs, but was is itself an end, reAos, and is perfect,
dp7(<y." Cyril.Thesaur. v.p. 41. S. Cyril TeAeioj/." Opusc. 26.
answers that ivork.s, ipya, are made foregoing note. A similar pas-
"^
vid.
%^wQ{vJ'rn)iitvitliout;h\\tt\\?Lto\xrVjmd, sage found in Cyril. Thesaur. v. p.
is
as S. Athanasius here says, is neither 42, Dial. ii. fin. This was retorting
a " work" nor " from without." And the objection the Arians said, " How
;
hence he says elsewhere that, while can God be ever perfect, who added to
men are fathers first in posse then in Himself a Son ?" Athan. answers,
God " How can the Son not be
act, is Zwafjui re Kal evepyeia ira- eternal,
T-fip. Dial. 2. p. 458. (vid. supr. p. 65. since God is ever perfect ?" vid. Greg.
notem.)Victorinusin like manner ,says, Nyssen. contr. Euiiom. Append, p. 142.
that God is potentia et actione Deus Cyril. Thesaur. x. p. 78. As to the
sed in seterna Adv. Ar. i. p. 202. and
; Son's perfection, Aetius objects ap.
he quotes S.
Alexander, speaking- ap- Epiph.Hier.76. pp. 925, 6, that growth
parently in answer to Arius, of a sem- and consequent accession from without
per generans generatio. And Arius were essentially involved in the idea of
scoffs at aeiyivv^s and ayevfT^Toyevris. Sonship; whereas S.Greg. Naz. speaks
Theod. Hist. i. 4. p. 749. And Origen of the Son as not areXri trpdrepov, elra
luid said, 6 acorrip del yevyarai. ap. Te\€iov, cimrep v6^osTrisrifJLfr4pasyiVi-
Routh. Reliq. t. 4. p. .304. and S. Di- (Tiois. Orat. 20. 9 fin. In like manner,
onysius calls Him the Radiance, &uap- S. Basil argues against Eunomius, that
Xov Koi aeiyefis. Athan. S. D. 15. S. the Son is reKeios, because He is the
Augustine too says, Semper gignit Image, not as if copied, which is a
Pater, et semper nascitur Filius. Ep. gradual work, but as a xapa/cr^p, or
238. n. 24. Petav. de Trin. ii. 5. n. 7. iinjiression of a seal, or as the know-
quotes tlie following passage from leclge communicated from master to
Tlxeodorus Abucara, " Since the Son's scholar, which comes to the latter and
generation does but signify His having exists in him perfect, without being lost
His existence from the Father, which to the former, contr. Eunom. ii. 16 fin.
202 If our Lord is not from the Father's substcmce, He is not a Son.
''
Disc. There was once when He was not;" for things which are
— — generate were
'-
p. US^
151. rather the Spirit Himself takes from the Son, as He Himself
To he beyotten is to
participate v^holly. 203
and
not reasonable to say tliat the latter is
it is Chap.
says ;
and when the Son says that God is His own Father, it fol-
lows that what is partaken is not external, but from the
substance of the Father. And as to this again, if it be
other than the substance of the Son, an equal extravagance
willmeet us ; there being in that case something between
this that isfrom the Father and the substance of the Son,
whatever that be '^.
Son ? And
thus of the Son Himself, all things partake
according to the grace of the Spirit coming from Him ;
- -
de Deer.
§ 31.
^
Here is taug'ht us the strict unity urged against the Catholics by Aetius, p. 57.
of the Divine Substance. When it is Epiph. Hjer. 76. 10. Thus Athan. says,
de Deer. " He has
said tliat the First Person of the Holy § 30. given the au-
Trinity comnniiiicates divinity to the thority ofthings to the Son, and,
all
Second, it is meant that that one Es- having given it, is once more, iraKiv,
sence which is the Father, also is the the Lord of all things through the
Son. Hence the force of the word AV"ord."supr.p.55. Again, "the JFather
6fj.oov(ndv, which was in consequence liaving given all things to the Son,
accused of Sabellianism, but was dis- has all things once fig-ain iraMv . . .
tinguished from it by the particle oixoii, for the Son's Godhead is tlie Godhead
"together," which implied a difference of the Father." Orat. iii.§ 36 fin. [infra
as well as unity; —
whereas TauTooucrioi' pp. 452, 453]. Hence rj eV tov Trarphs
or ffvvovaiov implied, with the Sa- eisrhfvlhv Oeorris appfvarws koI a^iai-
bellians, an identity or a confusion, perais rvyxo-vei. Expos. F. 2. vid.
The Arians, on the other hanil, as in note " Vera et {et<'rna supr.
p. 145, r. sub-
the instance of Eusebius, &c. supr. p. stantia, in se tota permancns, totam se
63, note g; p. 116, note h; considered cotetenipe vcritati nativitatis indul-
the Father and the Son two ovalai. sit." Fwlgt-nt. Ilcsp. 7. And S. Hilary,
" Filius in
The Catholic doctrine is that, though I'atre est et in Filio I'ater,
the Divine Substance is l)oth the Fa- non per transfusionem,refusionemque
tlier Ingenerate and also the Only- mutuam. sed jicr viventis natune per-
bt'gotten Son, it is not itself a7€V;'7}Tos- fectani nativitatem." Trin. vii. 31.
or -yej'i/rjT^ ; which was the objection
204 Generation doesnotimply division or affection of substance.
Disc, and this shews that the Son Himself partakes of nothing,
—
'
but what is partaken from the Father, is the
Son; for, as
partaking of the Son Himself, we are said to partake of
^Jofi-it' ^^^'' ^^^ *^^^ ^^ ^^^* Peter said, that ye may he partakers^
1 Cor. 3, in a divine nature; as Know
says too the
Apostle, ye not,
2^Cor. 6,
^^'^^^
y^ ^^'^ * and. We are the temple of the
temjple of God ?
16.
living God. And beholding the Son, we see the Father;
-
nd'.''de''
^^^' *^®
thought and comprehension of the Son, is know-
Syn. §
ledge concerning the Father, because He is His proper
offspring from His substance. And since to be partaken
no one of us would ever call affection or division of God's
substance, (for it has been shewn and acknowledged that
God participated, and to be participated is the same
is
note f.
Him what he falsely imagines of His offspring.
CHAP. VI.
SUBJECT CONTINUED.
Third proof of the Son's eternity, viz. from other titles indicative of His
consubstantiahty as the Creator
; ; as One of the Blessed Trinity ;
as
Wisdom as Word as Image. If the Son a perfect Image of the Father,
; ;
why is He not a Father also? because God, being perfect, is not the origin
of a race. Only the Father a Father because the Only Father, only the
Son a Son because the Only Son. Men are not really fathers and really
sons, but shadows of the True. The Son does rot become a Father, because
He has received from the Father, to be immutable and ever the same.
1. This
thouglit is of itself a sufficient refutation of the Chap.
'
Arian heresy ; however, its heterodoxy will appear also from
the following :
—
If God be Maker and Creator, and create ^
His works through the Son, and we cannot regard things
which come to be, except as being through the Word, is it
not blasphemous, God being Maker, to say, that His Fram-
ing Word and His Wisdom once was not ? it is the same as
saying, that God is not Maker, if He had not His proper
Framing Word which is from Him, but that That by which
He frames, accrues to Him from without^, and is alien from p. 43, ^
it ^o^oi
a.vo-
on, and is now not thus, and then again thus ? For probably
it will receive some fresh accession, and so on without limit,
imputing
and therefore it dissociates it from all things generated,
and it guards as indivisible and worships the unity of the
Godhead Itself; and shuns the Arian blasphemies, and con-
fesses and acknowledges that the Son was ever; for He
is eternal, as is the Father, of whom He is the Eternal
WTord,
—
to which subject let us now return again.
4. If God be, and be called, the Fountain of wisdom and § 19,
life,
— as He says by Jeremiah, They have forsaken Me the Jer.2,\3.
the —
Fountain of wisdom, this implies that life and wisdom
^^*
Disc. all things were made, and without Him was made not one
And t'liis Word is Christ
I.
thing ^. for there is One God, the
;
John 1,
3. Father, from whom are all things, and we for Him; and
1 Cor One Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and
6.
ive through Him. And if all things are througli Him, He
Himself is not to be reckoned with that " all." For he who
1
vid. dares ^
to call Him, through whom are
things, one of that all
Petav.
de Trin. "all," surely will have like speculations concerning God, from
ii. 12.
whom are all. But if he shrinks from this as extravagant, and
§4.
excludes God from that all, it is but consistent that he should
also exclude from that all the Only-Begotten Son, as being
that we may neither say that God was ever without His Eational
Word'', nor that the Son was non-existing*. For wherefore a
'
auv-
irapKTOv *
The words "that was made" which is wise ;
which would be a kind of Sa-
ends this verse were omitted by the bellianism. But, whereas their op-
ancient citers of it, as Irenseus, Cle- ponents said that He was but called
ment, Origen, Eusebius, TertuUian, Word and Wisdom after the attribute,
(vid. supr. p. 95, note c,) they
said that
nay, Augustine ; but because it was
abused by the Eunomians, Macedoni- such titles marked, not only a typical
ans, &c. as if derogatory to the divinity resemblance to the attribute, but so full
it was quoted in full,
of the Holy Spirit, a correspondence and (as it were) coin-
asby Epiphanius (Ancor. 75), who goes cidence in »ja^j«re with it, that whatever
so far as to speak severely of the an- relation th.at attribute had to God, such
cient mode of citation, vid. Fabric, and in kind had the Son —
that the attri-
;
Routh.ad Hippol.contr.Noet.l2. [The bute was His symbol, and not His mere
CodexAlex.and some other uncial MSS. archetype that our Lord was eternal
;
punctuate so as to join these words to the and proper to God, because that attri-
following verse; so does S. Cyril Alex.] bute was, which was His title, vid.
''
&Xoyov. vid. supr. p. 25, note c, Athan. Ep. M^. 14 [Hist, tracts pp.
where other instances are given from 1 42, 143 O.T.] , that our Lord was that
Origen, supr. p. 48. out which the Father was not wise ;
—
Athenag. Leg. 10. Tat. contr. Graec. not, that is, in the way of a formal
S.Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 10. Hipp, contr. cause, but in fact. Or, whereas the
Noet. 10. Nyssen. contr. Eunom. vii. Father Himself is Reason and Wis-
p. 215. viii. pp. 230, 240. Orat. Catech. dom, the Son is the necessary result of
l.Naz. Orat. 29. 17 fin. Cyril. Thesaur. that Reason and Wisdom, so that, to
xiv. p. 145. (vid. Petav. de Trin. vi. say that there was no Word,
would im-
ply there was no Divine
Reason just
9.) It must not be supposed from these ;
instances that the Fathers meant that as a radiance implies a light ; or, as Pe-
our Lord was literally what is called tavius remarks, 1. c. quoting the words
the attribute of reason or wisdom in which follow shortly after in the text,
the Divine Essence, or in other words the eternity of the Original implies the
that He was God merely viewed as He eternity of the Image ttjj viroaraffeois
;
If our Lord the Image of the Father, He is from His substance. 209
Son, if not from Him ? or wherefore Word and Wisdom, if not Chap.
ever proper to Him ? When then was God without Him who —^^'
is proper to Him ? or how can a man consider that which is "^
^
proper, as foreign and alien in substance ? for other things, i
awo-
according to the nature of things generate, are without like- "^P'""-
ness in substance with the Maker but are external to Him, supr.
;
made by the Word at His grace and will, and thus admit of P- ^•^*^'
ceasing to be, if it so pleases Him who made them for such '^•,
"
isthe nature of thiugs generate But as to what is proper - infr.
.
there was ever in Him the Truth, which is the Son, who says,
I am the Truth. And the Subsistence existing, of course John 14,
there was forthwith its Expression and Image for God's ^• ;
XapaKTripaKalT7]v elKovaravT-qs, ^ '20. for He is in, and and one witli, the
vid. also infr. § 31. de Deer. § 13. p. Father, who has neither beginning
21 .
§ 20, 23. pp. 35, 40. Theod. Hist, nor end. On tlie question of tlie " will
" as it affects the
i. 3. p. 737. of Ciod doctrine, vid.
This was but the opposite aspect
•^
Orat. iii. § .'59, &c.
of the tenet of our Lord's consubstan- ''
Atlian. arfi^ues from the very name
tiality or eternal freneration. For if Imafife for our Lord's eternity. An
He came into beinf? at the will of (Jod, Imaji^e, to be really such, must be an
by the same will He mij^lit cease to expression from the Orifjfinal, not an
be but if His existence is nncondi-
;
external and detarlu'd imitation, vid.
tional and necessary, as God's attri- supr. note b. infr. § 20. p. 217. Hence
butes might be, then as He had no " He is an
S. Basil, Image not made
The " "
210 title Image hnjolies eternity.
without limit; for tliis is to make the Begotten like Him that Chap.
VI.
begat Him/^ Authors of blasphemy, verily, are these foes of
God ^
!
who, sooner than confess that the Son is the Father's
Xot, p. 6,
Image ^, conceive material and earthly ideas concerning the note n.
Father Himself, ascribing to Him severings- and eflQuences^ - TOjUOLJ,
63,
and influences. If then God be as man, let Him be also a p. ref. 2.
^
parent as man, so that His Son should be father of another, atro^-
and so in succession one from another, till the series they p. 19,
imagine grows into a multitude of gods^. But if God be
note q.
18.
not as man, as He is not, we must not impute to Him the ^p.
attributes of man. For brutes and men, after a Creator has
begun them, are begotten by succession; and the son, having
been begotten of a father who was a son, becomes accord-
ingly in his turn a father to a son, in inheriting from his
father that by which he himself has come to be. Hence in
such instances there is not, properly speaking, either father
or son, nor do the father and the son stay in their respec-
tive characters, for the son himself becomes a father, being
f
The objection is tliis, that, if our ling implication of some of the Greek
TiOrd be the Father's Iniag^e, He ou^ht Fathers, that the First Person in the
to resemble Him in beinpf a Father. Holy Tiinity, considered as Father, is
S. Atlianasius answers that God is not not God. E. g. et 5e 6ehs 6 vlhs, ouk
as man witli us a son becomes a
;
iirel vios' ofxoliiis Kal 6
Tzarrip, ovk eVei
father because our nature is peuo-r?;, TTaTTip, dfus' dA\' enfl oucria ToiaSe, eTs
transitive and witliout stay, ever shift- (crri naTrip Kal 6 vlhs 6e6s. Xyssen. t. i.
ing and passing on into new forms and p. 915. Tid. Petav. de Deo'i. 9. § 13.
relations ; but that God is perfect and Should it be asked,
" What is the Fa-
ever the same, what He is once that ther not God ? " it is enough to an-
if
He continues to be ; God the Father swer, "the Father." Men differ from
remains Father, and God tlie Son each otlier as being individuals, but
remains Son. Moreover men become the characteristic difference between
fathers by detachment and transmis- Father and Son is, not that they are
sion, and what is received is handed on individuals, but that they are Father
in a succession whereas the Father,
; and Son. In these extreme statements
by imparting Himself wholly, begets it must be ever borne in mind that we
the Son and a perfect nativity finds
; are contemplating divine things ac-
its termination in itself. The Son has cording to our 7iotio)is, not in J'acf:
not a Son, l)ecause the Father has not i. e.
speaking of the Almighty Father,
a Father. Thus the Father is the only as such ; there being no real separa-
true Father, and the Sononlytrue Son ; tion between His Person and His Sub-
the Father only a Father, the Son only stance. It may be added, that, though
a Son ; being really in Their Persons theologians differ in their decisions, it
what human fathers are but by office, would appear that oiu* Lord is not the
character, accident, and name ; vid. Image of the Father's person, but of
supr.p.l8,note Andsince the Father
o. the Father's substance; in otherwords,
is unchangeable as Father, in nothing not of the Father considered as Father,
does the Son more fidfil the idea of a but considered as God That is, God
perfect Imagethan in being unchange- the Son is like and equal to God the
able too. Thus S. Cyril also, Thesaur. Father, because theyare both the same
10. p. 124. And this perhaps may God ; vid. p. 149, note x. also next
illustrate a strong and almost start- note.
2
212 Because tlieFathev the only Father and the Son the only Son.
Disc. SOU of liis fatliei^ but father of his sou. not so iu But it is
^-
the Godhead ; for not as man is God
Father is not
; for the
from father therefore doth He not beget one who shall
;
^
1
airo^. beget ; nor is the Son from effluence of the Father, nor is
^oi'as jje begotten from a father that was begotten; therefore
neither is He
begotten so as to beget. Thus it belongs to
the Godhead alone, that the Father is properly s father, and
the Son properly son, and in Them, and Them only, does
2 "
^o-TTj-
-^ -^^Yd that the Father is ever Father and the Son ever
^ 22. Son. Therefore he who asks why the Son has not a son,
must inquire why the Father had not a father. But both
suppositions are indecent and irreligious exceedingly. For
as the Father is ever Father and never could be Son, so the
Son is ever Son and never could be Father. For in this
rather is He shewn to be the Father's Expression and Image,
remaining what He is and not changing, but thus receiving
from the Father to be one and the same. If then the Father
change, let the Image change; for so is the Image and
Radiance in its relation towards Him who begat It. But
if the Father is unalterable, and what He is that He con-
Whether, in the generation of the Son, God made One that was ab-eady, or
One that was not.
Him who is, or him who was ? therefore did He make the
*
This miserable procedure, of mak- supr. p. 91, note q. He speaks of the
ing sacred and mysterious subjects a heretics as "aiming at one thing only,
matter of popular talk and debate, how to make good or refute points of
which is a sure mark of heresy, had "
argument," making every market-
received a great stimuhis about this place resound with their words, and
time by tlie rise of tlie Anomceans. spoiling every entertainment with their
Eusebius's testimony to the profane- trifling and offensive talk." Orat. 27.
ness whicli attended Arianism upon its 2. The most remarkable testimony of
rise, lias been given above, p. 75, note the kind though not concerning Con-
h. The Tlialia is another instance of stantinople, is given by S. Gregory
it. S. Alexander speaks of the inter- Nyssen,and often quoted," Men of yes-
ference, even judicitil, in its behalf terday and the day before, mere me-
against himself, of disobedient women, chanics, off-hand dogmatists in theo-
5i' evrvxias
yvvaiKapicou araKTUiv & y/ira- logy, servants too and slaves that have
rricrav, and of tiie l)usy and indecent been flogged, runaways from servile
gadding about of tlie younger, e'/c rov work, are solemn with ns and philoso-
irepirpoxo-C^i-V rratrov h/yvLav aae/xvcos. phical about things incomprehensible
ap. Theod. Hist. i. 3. p. 730, also p. . . With such the whole city is
. .
747 ;
also of the men's buffoon conver- full its smaller gates, forums, squares,
;
there was a war of dialectics." Hist. ii. pric<* of bread, he answers, (ireater is
2. This mania raged especially in the Father, and the Son is subject; say
Constantinople, ami S. Gregory Naz. that a bath would suit you, and he de-
speaks of "Jezebels in as thick a crop fines that the Son is out of nothing."
as hemlock in a field." Orat. 35. 3. vld. t. 2. p. 89S.
214 As God exists witliout 2)Jttce, and creates without materials,
Disc. Son, wliereas He was, or "wliereas He was not'' ?^' And again,
'- — "Is tlie Ingenerate one or two V and ''Has He free will,
and yet does not alter at His own being of an
clioice, as
alterable nature ? for He is not as a stone to
remain by Him-
self nnmoveable.'' Next they turn to women, and address
them in turn in this womanish language ; " Hadst thou a
son before bearing ? now, as thou hadst not, so neither was
the Son of God before His generation." In such language
do the disgraceful men sport and revel, and liken God to
men, pretending to be Christians, but changing God's glory
Rom. 1, into an image made man^.
UJ:e to corrttjjtihle
1
p. 179 ^- ^^^ords so senseless and dull deserve no answer at all ;
ref. 3.
however, lest their heresy appear to have any foundation, it
"'^'
s
may be right, though we go out of the way for it, to refute
them even here, especially on account of the women who are
so readily deceived by them. When they thus speak, they
should inquire of an architect, whether he can build without
materials; and if he cannot, whether it follows that God
-
supr. could not make the universe without materials -. Or they
note o. should ask every man, whether he can be without place; and
if he cannot, whether it follows that God is in place^; that
^ de
not make man His pattern ; but rather we men, for that Chap
God properly, and alone truly ^, Father of His Son, are j-P-56,
is
. ,
also called fathers of our own children ; for of Him is every note k.
Disc. once was notj considering tlie number of tlie proofs al-
I.
John 1, 1.
ready adduced against tliem ; while John besides saySj The
Heb. 1,3. Word luas, and Paul again writes^ TT7(0 heing the brightness
Rom.
of His glory, and, Who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
0,
5.
§
9.^ 4. They had best have been silent ; but since it is other-
wise, it remains to meet their shameless question with a bold
lyicl.
retort^. Perhaps on seeing the counter absurdities which
Basil, beset themselves, they
contr. may cease to fight against the truth.
Eunom. .After many prayers'^ then that God would be gracious to us,
ii. 17. thus we might ask them in turn God who is, has He so
;
'
fiyoviv become -, whereas He was not ? or is He also before His ge-
3
yevriTai neration whereas He is, did He make Himself, or is He of
^?
«p.2,
rational ^. As then if a person saw the sun, and then inquired
note and " Did that which
c.
concerning its radiance, said, is make
^
This cautious and reverent way bit of tlie religiousman is to worship the
of speaking is a characteristic of S. All(Tb7rai') in silence, andto hymn God
Athanasius.
" had come to the re-
I his Benefactor with thankful cries, . . .
sohition to be silent at this time, but but since," &c. contr. Apoll. i. init. " 1
on tiie exhortation of your holiness, &c. must ask another question, bolder, yet
I have in few words written this Epis- with a religious intention be propi- ;
tle, and even this hardly, of which doyou tious, O Lord, &c." Orat. iii. 63 [infra
supply the defects," &c. ad-Serap. i. 1. p. 490]. vid. p. 20, ref. 1. p. 25, note
vid.ii.init.ad.Epict.13iin.adMax.init. c. p. 153, note d.
Prsef. ad Monach, "The unwearied ha-
Bid the Father need an instrument to create, He notjyerfed. 217
that which was^ or that which was not/' he would be held Chap.
not to reason sensibly, but to be utterly mazed, because he '—
question; The—Father who was, made the Son who was, for
the Word was made flesh; and, whereas He was Son of John 1,
upyavov, vid. p. 12, notez. p. 118. Eccles. Theol. i. 8. supr. p. G2, note f.
note n. p. 02, note f. This was alleged and by the Anomoeans, supr. p. 12,
by Arius, Socr. i. 6. and by Eusebius, note x.
CHAP. VIII.
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED.
Whether we may decide the question by the parallel of human sons, which
are born later than their parents. No, for the force of the analogy lies in
the idea of connaturality. Time is not involved in the idea of Son, but is
adventitious to it, and does not attach to God, because He is without parts
and passions. The titles Word and Wisdom guard our thoughts of Him
and His Son from tliis misconception. God not a Father, as a Creator, in
posse from eternity, because creation does not relate to the substance of God,
as generation does.
foolisli
is tlieir other
very simple and
they put to women; or none besides
inquirjj -wliich
that which has been already given, namely, that it is not
suitable to measure divine generation by the nature of men.
However, that as before they may pass judgment on them-
selves, it is well to meet them on the same ground, thus :
—
Plainly, if they inquire of parents concerning their son, let
them consider whence is the child which is
begotten. For,
granting the parent had not a son before his begetting, still,
afterhaving him, he had him, not as external or as foreign,
but as from himself, and proper to his substance and his
unvarying image, so that the former is beheld in the latter,
and the latter is contemplated in the former. If then they
assume from human examples that generation implies time,
why not from the same infer that it implies the Natural
and the Proper*, instead of extracting serpent-like from the
earth only what turns to poison ? Those who ask of parents,
^
supr. p. 10,'noteu. The question Arians on the other hand said, that
was, Jr/iatwus thatsense of Son which to suppose a true Son, was to think of
would apply to the Divine Nature ? God irreverently,'as implj-ing division.
The Catholics said that its essential change, &c. The Catholics replied
meaning coithl apply, viz. consubstan- that thenotion of materiality was quite
tiality,whereas the point of posteriority as foreign from the Divine Essence as
to the Father depended on a condition, time, and as the Divine Sonship was
time, which could not exist in the in- eternal, so was it also clear both of
stance of God. p. 16, note k. The imperfection or extension.
God's Son like man's, in connaturality, not in point of time. 219
and ''
Hadst thou a son before tliou didst beget him
say, Chap. V
should add, " And if thou hadst a son, didst thou purchase -
him from without as a house or any other possession ^ And p- 21. V '
not so much in what they say, as in Orat. iii. §5 [infra p. 405]. And thus
what they deny. The truth, on the the Auctor de Trin. refers to " Peter,
other hand, is a positive and compre- Paul, and Timothy having three sub-
hensive doctrine, and in consequence sistencies and one humanity." i.
p.
necessarily mysterious and open to 918. S. Cyril even seems to deny that
misconception, vid. p. 43, note d. p. each individual man maybe consider-
140, note n. When Athan. implies ed a separate substance excei)t as the
that the Eternal Father is in the Son, Three Persons are such (Dial. i. p.
though remaining what He is, as a 409) and S. Gregory Nyssen is led to
:
man in his child, he is intent only upon say that, strictly speaking, the abstract
the point of the Son's connaturality tnnn, which is predicated of sejjarate
and equality, which the Arians denied, individuals, is still one, and this with
In like manner he says in a later Uis- a view of illustrating theDivineUnity.
course, "In the Son the Father's god- ad Ablab. t. 2. p. 449. vid. Petav. dc
head is beheld. The Emperor's count- Trin. iv. 9.
220 As So)i images connatiiralltij, so Radiance co-existence^
Lord's Sonship, that He is the Word, timonluni dat, quia de slnlbus Patris
or as S. Augustine says, Christum ideo descendit. Archel. Disp. p. 185. "We,
Filium quia Verbum. Aug. Ep. 120. as saying that the Word of God is
" If God is the Father of a
11. Word, incapable of defilement, even by the
why is not He which is begotten a assumption of mortal and vulnerable
Son?" de Deer. § 17. supr. p. 27 "If :
flesh, fear not to believe that He is
I speak of AVisdom, I speak of His born of a Mrgin ; ye" Manichees,
offspring;" Theoph. ad Autolyc. i. 3 : "because with impious perverseness
" Tlie
Word, the genuine Son of ye believe the Son of God to be capa-
Mind;" Clem. Protrept. p. 58. Peta- ble of it, dread to commit Him to the
vius discusses this subject accurately flesh." August, contr. Secund. 9. Faus-
witii reference to the distinction be- tus "is neither willing to receive Jesus
tween Divine generation and Divine of the seed of David, nor made of a
Procession, de Trin. vii. 14. woman .... nor the death of Christ it-
self, and biu-ial, and resurrection, &c."
'
Heretics have frequently assigned
reverence as the cause of their oppo- August, contr. Faust, xi. 3. As the
sition to the Church ; and if even Manichees denied our Lord a body, sit
Arius affected it, the plea may be ex- theAi)oIlinaiiansdenied Himarational
" O stultos et
pected in any other. soul, still under pretence of reverence,
inipios metus," says S. Hilary, "et ir- because, as they said, the soul was
religiosam de Deo soUicitudinem," de necessarily sinful. Leontius makes this
Trill, iv. 6. It was still more common- their main argument, o roCs a/xapxTjTt-
regard to the Catholic
ly professed in k6s ian. de Sect. iv. p. 507. vid. also
doctrine of the Incarnation. Thus Greg. Naz. Ep. 101. adCledon. p. 89 ;
Disc. 4, Enough was said above to shew that the offspring from
— — God
:
is not an affection ; and now it has been shewn in par-
ticular that the Word is not begotten according to affection.
The same may be said of Wisdom God is not as man nor ; ;
yove
fTTiye- adventitious ^
to God, lest He seem alterable ; for if it is good
He be
Father, yet He has not ever been Father, then
that
good has not ever been in Him.
§ 29. 5. But, observe, say
they, God was always a Maker, nor is
the power of framing adventitious to Him; does it follow
then,
that, because He is the Framer of all, therefore His works
also are eternal, and is it wicked to say of them too, that
they were not before generation ? Senseless are these Arians ;
for what Hkeness is there between Son and
Work, that they
should parallel a father's with a maker's function ? How is it
that, with that difference between offspring and work, which
has been shewn, they remain so ill-instructed ? Let it be re-
peated then, that a work is external to the nature, but a son
is the proper
offspring of the substance ; it follows that a
work need not have been always, for the workman frames it
when he will but an offspring is not subject to will, but is
;
Orat iii.
Pi'oper to the substance -. And a man may be and may be
79. SO.Athan.&c.calltheApollinarian Ep. 21. 1 "Forbid it," he says
fin.
1^^' doctrine Manichean in consequence, at Constantinople, "that I should say
vid. in Apoll. ii 8. 9. &c. Again, tlie that the Christ was of two natures, or
Eranistes in Theodoret, who advo- should discuss the nature, (^ufnoAoyerj/,
rates a similar doctrine, will not call our
ofniy(Jod." Concil. t. 2. p. 157 [in
Lord man. " I consider it important Act.'prima cone. Clialc. t. iv. 1001 ed.
to acknowledge an assumed nature. Col.]. Andsoin thisdaypopularTracts
but to call the Saviour of the world have been published,' S.
ridiculing-
man is to impair our Lord's glory." Luke's account of our Lord's nativity
Eranist. ii. p. 83. Eutyches, on the under pretence of reverence towards
other hand, would call our Lord man, the God of all, and intei-])reting
Scrip-
but refused to admit His human na- ture allegorically on Pantheistic
prin-
^!(rf,and still with the same profession, ciples. A modern argument for Uni-
" " sciens sanctos et
Ego," he says, versal Restitution takes the same
beatos patres nostros refutantes dua- form ; "
Do not we shrink from the
rum naturarum vocabulum, ct non notion of another's being sentenced
audens de natiu-a tractare Dei ^'erbi, to eternal punishment and are we
;
qui in carnem venit, in veritate non in 7nore merciful than God ?" vid. Matt.
])hantasmate fiomo factus," &c. Leon. xvi. 22, 23.
Not God cannot make, hut creatures cannot he made, eternally. 223
called Maker, thongli tlie works are not as yet but father Chap. ;
^'^^'
he cannot be callecb nor can he be^ unless a son exist. And
if they curiously inquire why God, though always with the
power to make, does not always make, (though this also be
the presumption of madmen, iovwho hath Icnown the mind o/Rom.
the Lord, or ivho hath heen His Counsellor ? or how shall the 15' 9^ 20.
the potter, tvhy hast thoii made me thus ?
tiling formed saij to
B
Athan.'s aig'ument is as follows: perish," in the Psalm, not as a fact
that, as it is of the essence of a son to but as the definition of the nature of
be conHa/M>'«/ with the father, so is it a ereatiu'e. Alsoii. §1 [infra p. 282] ,
of the essence of a creature to be of where he says, " It is proper to erea-
nothing, e| ovk ovrwv; therefore, while tiu-es and works to have said of them,
it was not inipossil)leyrowj tite nature e| ovk uvroiv and ovk ^v Trpli/ yiwrid^"
of the case, for Almighty God to l)e vid. Cyril. Tlusaur. 9. p. G/. Dial. ii.
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED.
If it means
" without
tlieword. Father," tliere is but One Ingenerate
;
" without
if beginning or creation," there are two. Inconsistency of
Asterius. " Ingenerate" a title of God, not in contrast witli the Son, but
with creatures, as is "Almighty," or "Lord of powers." "Father" is
tlie truer title, as not only Scriptural, but implying a Son, and our
adoption as sons.
implied that there were two Gods, if the Son is by His very name not ayfv-
Christ was God in the sense in which vriros, but yevvT]Ths, but all yfyfnra.
the Father was. Hence Athan. retorts, are creatures; which he answers, as
(pdcTKovTes, ov Xfyofiiv 5vo ay4vt)Ta, de Deer. § 28. supr. p. 53, by saying
Ae^ouiri Suo 6eoi>s. Orat. iii. 16 [infra that Christianity had brought in anew
Plato used a.7eV- idea into theology, viz. the sacred doc-
p. 423] ; also ii. 38.
v7]Tov oi t\\<i Supreme God (supr. p. trine of a true Son, e/c ttjs oicn'as. This
51, noteb) ; the Valentinians, Tertull. was what the Arians had originally
contr. Val. 7 ; and Basiiides, Epiph. denied, %v rh ayiwrirov %v Se t^ v-n'
Hser. 31.10. S. Clement uses it, supr. avTov aA-qOais, Kal ouk «'« rris oiKxlai
p. 147,note t; and S. Ignatius applies avrov. Euseb. Nic. ap. Theod. Hist. i.
it to the Son, p. 147. S. Dionysius 5. When they were urged what ac-
Alex. puts as an hypothesis in contro- cording to them was the middle idea
versy the very position of the Ano- to which the Son answered, if they
mceans, on which their whole argu- would not accept the Catholic, they
ment turned, ap. Euseb. Prtep. vii. 19. would not define but merely said, yh-
viz. that r] ayewTjcria is the very ovaia vrina, dA\' ovk ojs tv tuv y^yvrj/ndTuv,
of God, not an attribute. Their view vid. p. 10, note u.
Different senses of the
word " IngenerateJ" 225
and confusion, provided they can but separate the Son from Chap.
the Father, and reckon the Framer of all among His works : —
Now first they may be convicted on this score, that, while
not
blaming the Nicene Bishops for their use of phrases
in Scripture, though these not injurious, but subversive
of their irreligion, they themselves went oflf upon the same
fault, that is, words not in Scripture ^ and those in
using ^P^^ p'
contumely of the Lord, knowing neither ivhat they say nor iTim.l,
^•
let them ask the Greeks,
whereof they ajjirm. For instance,
who have been it is a word of their
their instructors, (for
tron too of this heresy, has added in his own treatise, that
"
what is not made, but is ever, is ingenerate ^." They
ought then, when they ask the question, to add in what sense
''
they take the word ingenerate,'^ and then the parties ques-
tioned would be able to answer to the point.
2. But if they still are satisfied with merely asking, "Is § 31.
the Ingenerate one or two ?'' they mast be told first of all,
as ill-educated men, that many are such and nothing is such,
many which are capable of generation, and nothing is not
^ The two first senses here given occur, how Athan. used liis former
answer to the two first mentioned, de writings and worlicd over again his
Deer. § 28. and, as he there says,
are formerground,andsim|)]ifi('<l or cleared
plainlv irrelevant. The third in tlie de
what he liad said. In the de Deer.
Decr.'wliich, as he there observes, is A. D. 350, we have three senses of
ambiguous and used for a sophistical aYewT^Tor, two irrelevant and the third
tliird and ambiguous here in Onit. 1. (ti.'tS,) he
purpose, is here divided into ;
fourth, answering to the two senses divides the tiiird into two; in the de
which alone are assigned in the de Syn. Syn. (i55!»,) he rejects and omits the
§ 46. and on them tlie question turns, two first, leaving the two last, which
This is- an instance, of which many are the critical senses.
Q
226 Its different senses distinguished.
always"
were ingenerate, then they must constantly be told that the
Son as well as the Father must in this sense be called in-
generate. For He is neither in the number of things gene-
rated, nor a work, but has ever been with the Father, as
has already been shewn, in spite of their many variations
for the sole sake of testifying " He of
against the Lord, is
" He was not before His
nothing" and generation." When
then, after failing at every turn, they betake themselves to
the other sense of the question, ^'existing but not generated
of any nor having a father," we shall tell them that the
Ingenerate in this sense is only one, namely the Father ; and
they will take nothing by their question For to say that "=.
God is in this sense Ingenerate, does not shew that the Son
is a
thing generate, it being evident from the above proofs
that the Word is He is who begat Him. Therefore
such as
if God be
ingenerate. His Image is not generate, but an
Offspring ^, which is His Word and His Wisdom. For what
»
p. 209,
3397
'-P'
power of God or the wisdom of God, but, without the article,
iCor. 1, God's power and God's ivisdom ; thus preaching that the
^^'
proper power of God Himself, which is natural to Him and
'^
co-existent with Him something besides.
ingenerately^ is Chap.
And again, soon after "
However^
: His eternal power and —
wisdom, which truth argues to be unoriginate and ingene-
rate j this must surely be one.''' For though misunderstand-
ing the Apostle's words, he considered that there were two
wisdoms yet, by speaking still of a wisdom co-existent with
;
Disc, here Son reckoned among tliat all^ nor is God called
is tlie
^ ^'
Almighty and Lord with reference to Him^ but to those
things which through the Son come to be, and over which
He exercises power and mastery through the Word. And
therefore the Ingenerate is specified not by contrast to the
Son, but to the things which through the Son come to be.
And excellently : since God is not as things generate, but
is and Framer through the Son. And as the
their Creator
word Ingenerate " is specified relatively to things gene-
"
" Father " is indicative of the Son. And
rate, so the word
he who names God Maker and Framer and Ingenerate, re-
gards and apprehends things created and generated and
he ;
graph being an addition. p. 215. Greg. Naz. Orat. 31. 23. Epiph.
Ingenerate not a ivord of Scripture.
229
latter title, as I have said, does nothing more tban refer to all Chap.
IX
the works, individually and collectively, which have come to '—
I be at the will of God through the Word ; but the title Father,
has its significanceand its bearing ^ only from the Son. '
'/o-TaToi
Me, hath seen the Father, and I and the Father are One S; but
no where is He found to call the Father Ingenerate. More-
over, when He teaches us to pray, He says not, " When ye
pray, say, God Ingenerate,'' but rather, When ye pray, Luke 11,
from that name the Word in the Father Himself also A *>.
"
vain thing then is their argument about the term Ingene-
rate," as is now proved, and nothing more than a fantasy.
Haer. 76. p. 941. Grep^. Nyss. contr. 26.adAfr. 7.8. 9. vid. alsoEpiph. Hjer.
Eunom. vi. p. 192. &c. Cyril. Dial. ii. 64. 9. Basil. Hexaeni. ix fin. Cyr. Thes.
Pseudo-Basil, contr. Eunom. iv. p. 283. xii. p. 111. [add in S. Joan. 168, 847]
e These three texts are found to- Potam. Ep. ap. Daclier. t. 3. p. 299.
in Athan. parti- Hil. Trin. vii. 41. et supr. Vid. also
gether frequently
cularly in Orat. iii. where he con- Animadv. in Eustath. Ep. ad Apoll.
siders the doctrines of the
" Uom. 1796.
Image"
and the TTipix<ipr](ns. vid.de Deer. § •>
Here ends the extract from the de
21. § 31. de Syn. § 45. Orat. iii. 3.5. Decretis. The sentence following is
How the Word has free-will, yet without being alterable. He is unalterable
because the Image of the Father, proved from texts.
Disc.
I. 1 As to their question wliether the Word is alterable % it is
.
»
TpeTrrbs, i. e. not, changeable,
but being asked whether the Word of God
of a moral nature capable of improve- is capable of altering as the devil alter-
ment. Arius mahitained this in the ed, they scrupled not to say, 'Yea, Be
" Alex.
strongest terms at starting. "On is capable.' ap. Socr. i. 6. p. 11.
The Son unalterahle, because the Father's Image. 231
we tlie Father in the Son, because the Son is ever alter- Chap.
see
ing, and is of changing nature. For the Father is unaltera- i^-^ —
ble and unchangeable, and is always in the same state and
the same but if, as they hold, the Son is alterable, and not
;
always the same, but ever of a changing nature, how can such
a one be the Father's Image, not having the likeness of His
unalterableness ^ ? how can He be really in the Father, if His
'
s"pr-
able, and advancing daily. He is not perfect yet. But away P- ^12.
with such madness of the Arians, and let the truth shine
out, and shew that they are beside themselves. For must
not perfect who is equal to God? and
He be must not He
be unalterable, who is one with the Father, and His Son
proper to His substance ? and the Father's substance being
unalterable, unalterable must be also the proper Offspring
from it. And if they slanderously impute alteration to the
-
Word, let them learn how much their own reason is in peril-; note
p- 2,
G
for from the fruit is the tree known. For this is why he who
hath seen the Son, hath seen the Father, and why the know-
ledge of the Son is knowledge of the Father.
2. Therefore the Image of the unalterable God must be § 36.
unchangeable ;
for Jesus Christ is thesame yesterday, to-day, Heb. 13,
and for ever. And David in the Psalm says of Him, Thou, ^^^ j^
Lord, in the heginninrj hast laid the foundation of the earth, 10-12.
and the heavens are the ivork of Thine hands. They shall
perish,hut Thou remainest ; and they all shall ivax old as
doth a garment. And Thou fold them up,
as a vesture shall
and they shall he changed, hut
Thou art the same, and Thy
years shall not fail. And the Lord Himself says of Himself
throusfh the Prophet, See noiv that I, even I am He, and /D?ut.
change not. It may be said indeed that what
is here ex-
^^j^ g'
relates to the Father yet it suits the Son also to 6.
pressed ;
Disc, able, yet excepting the Son from tliese, shews us thereby
. '- — that He is in no wise a thing generate ; nay teaches that
He chang-es every thing else, and is Himself not changed,
in saying, Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not fail.
1
p. 223, And with reason ;
for things generate, being from nothing \
note g.
^^^ being before their generation, because, in truth,
j^Q^
changeable ; but the Son, being from the Father, and pro-
per to His substance, is unchangeable and unalterable as
the Father Himself. For it were sin to say that from that
substance which is unalterable was begotten an alterable
word and a changeable wisdom. For how is He longer the
Word, if He be alterable ? or can that be Wisdom which is
2
p. 37, changeable? unless perhaps, as accident in substance", so
note J.
they would have it, viz. as in any particular substance, a
certain grace and habit of virtue exists accidentally, which
iscalled Word and Son and Wisdom, and admits of
being
taken from it and added to it. For they have often express-
ed this sentiment, but it is not the faith of Christians; as not
ledge it as
religious, whence did these men of irreligion
draw this novelty ? from their heart as from a seat of cor-
3de Syn. ruption did they vomit it forth ^.
§ 16 fin.
p. yg.
CHAP. XI.
Various texts which are alleged against the Catholic doctrine e.g. Phil. ii.
:
9, 10. Whether the words " Wherefore God hath highly exalted" prove
moral probation and advancement. Argued against, first, from the force of
the word " Son ;" which is inconsistent with such an interpretation. Next,
the passage examined. Ecclesiastical sense of "highly exalted," and
" " wherefore
gave," and ;" viz. as being spoken with reference to our
"
Lord's manhood. Secondary sense ; viz. as implying the Word's exal-
"
tation through the resurrection in the same sense in which Scripture
speaks of His descent in the Incarnation ; how the phrase does
not derogate
from the nature of the Word.
1. But since they allege the divine oracles and force on Chap.
'
alted Him, and given Him a Name ivhich is above every name ;
that at the Name of Jesus every Inice should how, of things in
heaven and things in earth and things under the earth : and
David, Wherefore God, even Thy God, hath anointed T/^ee
Ps. 45, 9.
with the oil of gladness above Tliy fellows. Then they urge,
»
78, note n.
vid. supr. p. "We their sense not from their private
must not make an appeal to the Scrip- opinion, but by the writings and
tures, nor take up a position for the authority of the Fathers, &c," Hist,
ii. 9. "Seeing the Canon of
fight, in which victory
is not, or is Scripture
doubtful, or next to doubtful. For is perfect &c. what need we join
though this conflict of Scripture with unto it the authority of tlie (Huirch's
Scripture did not end in adrawn battle, understanding and interpretation?
yet the true order of the subject re-
because the Scripture being of itself
quired that that should be laid down so deep and profound, all men do not
first, which now becomes but a point understand it in one and the same
of debate, viz. w/jo A«re « c/rtJ»J to the sense, but so many men, so many
faith itself, xvhose are the Scriptures." opinions almost may be gathered oiit
Tertull. de Prsescr. 19 [pp. 467, 4(i8 of it; for Novatian expounds it one
O.T.] . Ruffinus says of S. Basil and way, Photinus another, Sabellius, &c."
Vincent. C'omm. 2. Hippolytus has a
S.Gregory, "Patting aside all Greek
have passed
literature, they are said to passage very much to the same pur-
thirteen years together in studying pose, contr. Noet. 9 fin.
the Scriptures alone, and followed out
234 If our Lord really Son, not really "exalted" and rewarded.
comedia.
vid.
to write ; while their partizans do not shrink from convers-
Theod.
ing about it in full market-place", not seeing how mad an
Hist. i. 5
2p. 213, argument they use. For if He received what He had
note a. as a reward of His good choice, and would not have had
it, unless He had needed it and
had His work to shew for
3
$e\Ti-
it, then having gained it from virtue and promotion^, with
"
reason had He therefore" been called Son and God, with-
out being very Son. For what is from another by nature,
is a real offspring, as Isaac was to Abraham, and Joseph
God who thus at the beginning gave them grace, will re-
ceive them, and give light, and call them sons again. But
§38.
if they say this of the Saviour also, it follows that He is
neither very God nor very Son, nor like the Father, nor in
His being according to
any wise has God for a Father of
substance, but of the mere grace given to Him, and for a
Creator of His being according to substance, after the simi-
litude of all others. And being such, as they maintain, it
" Son''
will be manifest further that He had not the name
from the first, if so be it was the prize of Works done and
of that very same advance which He made when He became
man, and took the form of a servant but then, when, after
;
Father, wiili the glory which I had with Thee before the
world was. If, as they say. He was then exalted, how did
He before that boiv the heavens and come down: and again, Ps. 18,
Disc, tlie world was made, the Son had that glory, and was Lord of
'- — glory and the Highest, and descended from heaven^ and is
ever to be worshipped, it follows that He had no promotion
from His descent, but rather Himself promoted the things
which needed promotion ; and if He descended to effect their
promotion, therefore He did not receive in reward the name
of the Son and God, but rather He Himself has made us sons
of the Fathei*,and made men gods, by becoming Himself man,
3, Therefore He was not man, and then became God, but
§ 39.
',
^fOTTOi-
He was God, and then became man, and that to make us gods ^.
Since, if when He became man, only then He was called Son
and God, but before He became man, God called the ancient
people sons, and made Moses a god of Pharaoh, (and Scrip-
Ps. 81, ture says of many, God siandeth in the congregation of gods,)
1 '/^ it is
plain that He is called Son and God later than they.
How then are all things through Him, and He before all? or
Col. 1,15. how is He firsf-born of the wliole creation", if He has others
Infr. ii. before Him who are called sons and gods ? And how is it
partakers ''do not partake of the Word ?
§ ^^- that those first
the Divine Word and Son, or in other was given in one way under the Law,
words were gifted with the Spirit, was given in another and fuller under
He asserts the same doctrine very the Gospel.
The text itself entered into . 237
something else beside^ them, but being all these by nature Chap.
and according to substance. For He is Offspring of the -
Father's substance, so that one cannot doubt that after the ref. 4.
resemblance of the unalterable Father, the Word also is un-
alterable.
4. Hitherto we have met their irrational conceits with the §40.
true conceptions implied in the Word " Son," as the Lord
'*
as God, He
took the form of a servant, and in taking it, did
not promote but humbled Himself. Where then is there here
any reward of virtue, or what advancement and promotion
in such humiliation ? For if, being God, He became man, and
descending from on high He is still said to be exalted, where
is He exalted, being God ? this withal being plain, that,
since God is highest of all. Word must necessarily be
His
highest also. Where then could He be exalted higher, who
'
^
is in the Father and like the Father in all thino-s ? 8mo«oj
. . Kara
5. Thei'efore He is beyond the need of any addition; nor -KoivTa,
issuch as the Arians think Him. For though the Word did V- H^-
note G '
^
ToTs ivvoiais xP'^Mf*"' '"'P^^ '''"^ irapdvoLa Se iiaWov, &c. Basil, contr.
iinvoiasa.Trr)UTriaaixiv. cl. oxixi imvoia, Euriom. i. 6. init.
238 The true ecclesiastical sense of the text.
Disc, to seek that wliicli He had already ? And wliat grace did
J
— — He
i^
receive wlio is the Giver of grace ^ ? or how did He re-
note q.'
ceive that Name for worship^ who is always worshipped by
His Name ? Nay, certainly before He became man, the
Ps. 54, 1. sacred writers invoke Him, Save me, God, for Thy Name's
lb. 20, 7. salce and again, Some put their trust in chariots, and some
;
in horses, hut ive tcill rememher the Name of the Lord our
God. And while He was worshipped by the Patriarchs, con-
Heb. 1,6. corning the Angels it is written. Let all the Angels of God
§ 41. v:orship Him. And if, as David says in the 71st Psalm, His
p"
' '
Name remaineth before the sun, and before the moon from one
5. Sept.
generation to another, how did He receive what He had al-
ways, even before He now received it ? or how is He exalted,
being before His exaltation, the Most High ? or how did
He receive the right of being worshipped, who before He
now received it, was ever worshipped ?
^
John 1, 6. It is not a dark saying but a divine mystery In the .
beginning ivas the Word, and the Word was ivith God, and the
Word ivas God ; but for our sakes afterwards the Word was
viade flesh. And the term in question, highly exalted, does
not signify that the substance of the Word was exalted, for
Phil, 2, 6. jjg -^as ever and is equal to God, but the exaltation is of the
manhood. Accordingly this is not said before the Word
became flesh; that it might be plain that humhled and exalted
are spoken of His human nature ; for where there is humble
estate, there too may be exaltation; and if because of His tak-
ing flesh humbled is written, it is clear that highly exalted is
i
d &v. also said because of it. For of this was man^s" nature in want,
dpwwos because of the humble estate of the flesh and of death. Since
then the Word, being the Image of the Father and immortal,
took the form of a servant, and as man underwent for us death
in Hi s flesh, that thereby He might oS'er Him self for us through
death to the Father; therefore also, as man, Heis said because
of us and for us to be highly exalted, that as by His death
*
Scripture is full of mysteries, but manner S. Ambrose says, Mare est
they are mysteries of/V/r^ not of words, scriptura divina, habens in se sensus
Its dark sayingfs or jenig-mata are such, profundos, et altitudinem prophetico-
because in the nature of tilings tliey rum cpnigmatum, &c. Ep. ii. 3. What
cannot be expressed clearly. Hence is commonly called "explaining
away"
contrariwise,Orat.ii.§ 77 fin. [p. 391], Scripture, is this transference of the
he calls Prov. viii. 22. an enigma, with obscurity from the subject to the words
an allusion to Prov. i. 6. Sept. In like used.
He is exalted, that is, in respect of His manhood. 239
ascending into
.
heaven, whither the forerunner is for us enter- Heb.
20-9
ed, not into the figures of the true, hut into heaven itself, now 24,'
6,
. ., '
enter the gates of heaven, which He has also opened for us,
the forerunners saying. Lift up your heads, ye gates, and Ps. 24, 7.
was exalted, it means in that sense in therefore is not applied to Him in the
wliich He could be exalted ; just as, in text in question. Thus, e. g-. S. Am-
saying that a man walks or eats, we brose '* I'bi humiliatus, ibi obediens.
:
received this so great grace, but we. For because of our Chap.
relationsbip to His Body we too have become God's temple, ^^ —
and in consequence are made God's sons, so that even in us
the Lord now worshipped, and
is beholders report, as the
Apostle says, that God is in them of a truth =. As also John
I
saith in the Gospel, As many as received Him, to them gave John 1,
He i^ower to become children of God ; and in his Epistle he
writes. By this ice Icnow that He abideth in us by His Spirit 1 John 3,
which He hath given us. And this too is an evidence of ^*"
His goodness towards us that, while we were exalted be-
cause that the Highest Lord is in us, and on our behalf
grace was given to Him, because that the Lord who supplies
the grace has become a man like us, He on the other hand, the
Saviour, humbled Himself in taking our body of humiliation,
and took a servant's form, putting on that flesh which was
enslaved to sin ^. And He indeed gained nothing from us for
Cor. xiv. 25.
s ovTcas eV vfilu 6 dfSs. 1 not to save Adam as free from sin, that
Athan. inteq)rets eV in not among ; as He should become like unto him but ;
also in 1 John iii. 24. just afterwards. as, in the net of sin and now fallen,
Vid. 4v ijjLoi. Gal. i. 24. evrhs Vfxwv, that God's mercy might raise him up
Luke xviL 21. iaK-hvoicnv ey vfuv, John with Christ." Leont. contr. Nestor.
i. 14. on which text Hoolver says, "It &c. ii. p. 996. Accordingly, Athan.
" Had not
pleased not the Word or Wisdom of says elsewhere, sinlessness
God to take to itself some one person appeared in t/ie nature which had sin-
among men, for then should that one ned, how was sin condemned in the
I have been advanced which was as- flesh?" in Apoll.ii. 6. "It was necessary
sumed and no more, but Wisdom, to for our salvation," says S. CjtH, "that
the end she might save many, built her the Word of God should become man,
house of that Nature which is common that human flesh subject to corruption
unto all she made not this or that
;
and sick with the lust q/' pleasures, He
man her habitation, but dwelt in us." might make His own and, whereas
;
'
and there is a glory of the 3. Ep. 31. 2. Ep. 165. 9. Serm. 22. 2.
glory ;
sun, and according to the Apostle even and 25. 5. It be asked whether
may
a ministration of condemnation with this doctrine docs not interfere with
glorj'. So many then being glorified, that of the immaculate conception but ;
choose you that the Spuit alone of all that miracle was wrought in order that
" de our Lord might not be born in original
should be without glory ? Sp. S.
c. 24. sin, and does not aflTect, or rather in-
(t wa-s usual to say against the
i"
cludes. His takingflesh of thesuhstance
ApoUinarians, that, unless our Lord
of the ^'irgin. i.e. of a fallen nature.
took on Him our nature, as it is. He If iiideed sin were of the substance
had not pm-ified and changed it, as it is, of our fallen nature, as some heretics
but another nature " The Lord came
;
have said, then He could not have
R
242 God the Word exalted in such sense as He ivas humbled ;
Disc. His own promotion ^ for the Word of God is without want
:
I.
and full but rather we were promoted from Him ; for He
;
atv, ex- is the Light, ivJiich lighteneth every man that cometh into the
ternal
IV rid.
advance.
John 1,9, 9. And in vain do the Arians lay stress upon the conjunc-
tion wherefore, because Paul has said, ^Yherefore hath God
raised from the dead, but remaining dead under the earth ;
not exalted into heaven, but lying in Hades. Because of
us then and in our behalf are the words^ ^^^ghly exalted and
given.
10. This then I consider the sense of this passage, and
*
§44.
(KkXt}-
that, a very ecclesiastical sense *. However, there is another
aiaffTi-
Khs, vid. way in which one might remark upon it, giving the same
Scrap. sense in a parallel way ; viz. that, though it does not speak
iv. 15.
coiitr. of the exaltation of the Word Himself, so far as He is Word ^,
Gent. 6.
(for He was just now said, most high and hke His Fa-
is, as
7.33.
* Orat. ii ,
taken our nature without partakhig as if," he says, " the devil wrought in
our sinfulness but if sin be, as it is, a
;
man a nature, (God forbid I) for of a
fault of the will, then the Divine Power nature cannot be maker
the devil
of the "Word could sanctify the human the impiety of the
{hfjixiovpyhs) as is
will, and keep it from swerving in the Manichees, but he Avrought a bias of
direction of evil. Hence S.Austin says, nature by transgression, and 'so death
"We say not that Christ by thefelicifi/ reigned over all men.' "Wherefore,
saith he, ' the Son of God came to
of a flesh separated from sense could
destroy the works of the devil ; what
'
not feel the desire of sin, but that hy
and by a flesh not works ? that natiu'e, which God made
perfection of virtue,
begotten through concupiscence
of the sinless, and the devil biassed to the
flesh. He had not the desire
of sin." transgression of God's command and
Op. Imperf. iv. 48. On the
other hand, the finding out of sin which is death,
S. Athanasius expressly calls it Mani- did God the Word raise again, so as to
chean doctrine to consider, tt^v <pv<Tiv be secure from the devil's bias and the
of the flesh a/j-apTiav, koI ov irpci^tv. tV finding out of sin. And therefore tlie
contr. ApoU. i. 12 fin. or (pvcriKr]v flvat Lord said, The prince of this world
'
1(3. .
is the same also who rose again. He descended in body, and ii_y'a.(Trds'
He rose again because He was God Himself in the body. iJut wa-
And this again is the reason why according to this meaning rec. t.
from Adam down to this time have died and remained dead.
He only rose in integrity from the dead. The cause is this,
which He Himself has already taught us, that, being God,
He has become man. For all other men, being merely born
of Adam, died, and death reigned over them but He, the ;
Second Man, is from heaven, for the Word was made flesh, John 1,
and this Man is said to be from heaven and heavenly ^, be- jn i
2. . i.
not held under death. For though He humbled Himself,
suffering His own Body to reach unto death, in that it was
^
capable of death ', yet it was highly exalted from earth, Se/cn-
-
wp, having loosed the bonds of death, because it was not 'possi-
ble that He should be holden For as Paul has written,
of it.
" Since God He became
being in form of man, and humbled
Himself unto death, therefore God also hath highly exalted
"
Him," so also Peter says, Since, being God, He became
It was a point in controversy with
'
tarily placed Himself under those laws,
the extreme Monophysites, that is, the and died naturally, vid. Athan. contr.
Eutychians, whether our Lord's body Apoll. i. 17. and tliat after the resur-
was naturally subject to death, the Ca- rection His body became incorruptible,
tholics maintaining the affirmative, as not according to nature, but by grace.
Athanasius here. Eutyches asserted vid. Leont. de Sect. x. p. 530. Anast.
that our Lord had not aluiman nature, Hodeg. c. 23. To express their doc-
by which he meant among otherthings trine of the vTrep<pves of our Lord's
that His manliood was not subject to manhood the Eutychians made use of
the laws of a body, but so far as He the Catholic expression " ut voluit."
submitted to them, He did so by an act vid. Athan. 1. c. Eutyches ap. Leon,
of will ineachparticularcase; andthis, "
Ep. 21. quomodo voluit et scit,"
lest it should seem that He was moved twice, vid. also Eranist. i. p. 11. ii.
by the Tra^Tj against His will aKouo-i'tos; p. 105. Leont. contr. Nest. i. p. 967.
and consequently that His manhood I'seudo-Athan. Serm. adv. Div. Haer.
was not subject to death. But the Ca- § 8. (t. 2. p. 570.)
tholics maintained that He had volun-
R 2
244 What belongs to the manhood,belongs to the Person of the Word,
men and an abolition of death, and tliat the resurrection and Chap.
XI.
exaltation may for His sake remain secure for us. In both
respects he hath said of Him, God hath highly exalted Him,
and God hath given to Him ; that herein moreover he may
shew that it is not the Father that hath become flesh, but
it is His Word, who has become man, and has received after
the manner of men from the Father, and is exalted by Him,
as has been said. And it is plain, nor would any one dis-
pute it, that what the Father gives. He gives through the
Son. And it is marvellous and overwhelming verily, that the
grace which the Son gives from the Father, that the Son
Himself is said to receive and the exaltation, which the Sou
;
effects from the Father, with that, the Son is Himself exal-
ted. For He who is the Son of God, He Himself became
the Son of Man ; and, as Word, He gives from the Father,
for all things which the Father does and gives. He does and
"
anointed," &c. imply that the Word has
'*
Whether the words therefore,"
been rewarded. first from the word
" fellows" or
Argued against "par-
takers." He is anointed with the Spirit in His manhood to sanctify human
nature. Therefore the Spirit descended on Him in Jordan, when in the
flesh. And He is said to sanctify Himself for us, and give us the glory He
has received. The word " wherefore" His " Thou hast
implies divinity.
loved righteousness," &c. do not imply trial or choice.
the irreligious men ; and what the Psalmist says admits also
§46. the same orthodox sense, which they misinterpret, but which
in the Psalmist is manifestly religious. He says then, Thy
throne, God, is for ever and ever ; a scepire of righteousness
is the sceptre of Thy Kingdom. Thou hast loved righteous-
ness, and hated
iniquity, therefore God, even Thy God, hath
anointed Thee ivith the oil of gladness above Thy fellows.
Behold, O ye Arians, and acknowledge even hence the
1
fisrS- truth. The Psalmist speaks of all us as fellows or partaJcers^
^°"^ of the Lord; but were He one of things which come out of
nothing and of things generate. He Himself had been one
of those who partake. But, since he hymned Him as the
eternal God, saying, Thy throne, God, is for ever and ever,
and has declared that all other things partake of Him, what
conclusion must we draw, but that He is distinct from gene-
rated things, and He only the Father's veritable AVord,
2
p. 15, Eadiance, and Wisdom, which all things generate partake"-,
note e.
"bgij^g sanctified by Him in the Spirit ^? And therefore He
"
is here anointed," not thatHe may become God, for He was
» It is
here said that all things gene- the special Principle of reason, as by
rate partake the Son and are sancfi- Origen, vid. ap. Athan. Scrap, iv. 9.
Jied by the Spirit. How a y^wrja-ir vid. himself, de Incarn. 11. These
or adoption through the Son is neces- oflBces of the Son and the Spirit are
sary for every creature in order to its contrasted by S. Basil, in his de Sp. S.
consistence, life, or preservation, has rhv irpocTarTovTa Kvptov, Thy Sr/jut-
been explained, supr. p. 32, note q. ovpyovvra \6yov, rh a-rfpeovv trvevixa,
Sometimes the Son was considered as &c. c. 16. n. 3S.
Our Lord was anointed, as He was exalted, for us. 247
so even before; nor that He may become King, for He Lad Chap.
Disc, said^ Mow God anointed Him ivitlt the Holy Ghost. When
- — '-
'
tlienwere these things spoken of Him but when He came
38. in the flesh and was baptized in Jordan, and the Spirit de-
John 16, scended on Him ? And indeed the Lord Himself said. The
14 7 •
. . . .
20 22. Spirit shall take of Mine ; and I will send Him ; and to His
disciples, Receive ye the Holy Ghost. And notmthstanding,
He who, as the Word and Radiance of the Father, gives
to others, now is said to be sanctified, because now He has
become man, and the Body that is sanctified is His. From
Him then we have begun to receive the unction and the
1 John 2, seal, John saying, And ye have an unction from the Holy
Eoh 1 13 ^'^^' ^^^ ^^® Apostle, And ye were sealed ivith the Holy
8;pirit of promise. Therefore because of us and for us are
these words.
3. What advance then of promotion, and reward of virtue
or generally of conduct, is proved from this in our Lord's
instance ? For if He was not God, and then had become
God, if King He was preferred to the Kingdom,
not being
your reasoning would have had some faint plausibility. But
if He is God and the throne of His
kingdom is everlasting,
in what way could God advance ? or what was there want-
^
Elsewhere Athan. says that our of the manhood, not sanctifying bj' an
Lord's Godliead was the immediate energy as the other Christs [anointed]
anointing or chrism of the manhood but by a presence of Him whole who
He assumed. "God needed not the anointed, oAoutoD xP'oi'tos; whence it
anointing.norwas the anointing made came what anointed was
to pass that
without God; but God both appUed called man and what was anointed was
it, and also received it in that body made God." Orat. 30. 20. " He Him-
which was capable of it." in Apollin. self anointed Himself; anointing as
ii. 3. and rh xp^'c/ua e7(<' o Aoyos, rh Se God the body with His Godhead, and
XpiffOiP W
i/xov 6 avdponros. Orat. iv. anointed as man." Damasc. F. O. iii.
§ 36 [infra p. 554]. vid. Origen. Peri- 3. Dei Filius, sicut pluvia in vcllus,
ai-ch.ii. 6. n% 4. And S.Greg. Naz. still toto divinitatis unguento nostram se
more expressly, and from thesame text fudit incarnem. Chrysolog. Serm. 60.
as Athan. " The Father anointed Him It is more common, however, to con-
'
with theoil of gladness above His sider that the anointing was the de-
fellows,'anointing tlte manltood ivith scent of the Spirit, as Athan. says at
the Godhead." Orat. x tin. Again, the beginning of this section, accord-
" This
[the Godhead] is the anointing ing to Luke iv. 18. Acts x. 38.
The Word, before His incai'iiation, dispensed the Spirit. 249
cation coming to tlie Loi'd as man, may come to all men Chap.
from Him. For not of Itself, saith He, dotli the Spirit speak, ——'—
but the Word is He who gives It to the worthy. For this
is likethe passage considered above ; for as the Apostle has
written, Who existing in form of God thought it not robbery
to be equal with God, but humbled Himself, and toolc a ser-
garments
"=
smell of myrrh, aloes, and
repre- cassia; and it is
pounds IV eight ; and they the spices ivhich they had prepared Luke 24
for the burial of the Lord's body. 1-
said,) but, as has been written, The Word of God abideth § 51.
for ever. Surely as, before His becoming man. He, the g x^yol
Word, dispensed to the saints the Spirit as His own ^, so i^u* p^t^°-
also when made man, He sanctifies all by the Spirit and 3
*p, 036
did not change on putting round him abuse of the idea, vid. note in loc.
250 Man's nature changed in the Unchangeable Word.
Christ's manhood and oiu's ? how does so when we have tasted what de>itroys
it prove that human nature is sancti- our nature, we have need of that in-
fied because a particular specimen of it stead which restores what was des-
was sanctified in Him ? S. Chrysostom troyed .}.. But what is this ? nothing
" He is born of our sub- else than that Body which has been
explains ;
pertain to all ;' yea, to all. He min- was the beginning, /caTT)p|aTo, of our
gles {^o.vaiJ.lyvvffLv') Himself with the life. For a little leaven," &c. Orat.
faithful individually, through the my- Catech. 37. Decocta quasi per ollam
steries, and whom He has begotten carnis nostrJE cruditate, sanctificavit
those He nurses from Himself, not puts in seternum nobis cibum carnem suam.
them out to other hands," &c. Horn, Paulin. Ep. 23. Of course in such state-
in Matt. 82. 5. [p. 10[t2 O.T.] And ments nothing material'is implied; or,
" It sufficed not for Him as Hooker says, " The mixture of His
just before,
to be made man, to be scourged, to bodily substance with ours is a thing
be sacrificed; but He assimilates us to whiclitheancientFathersdisclaim. Yet
lA\m{a.va'pvpiLkavrhvi]ixiv),normeYe\Y the mixture of His flesh with oiu's they
by faith, but reallv, has He made us His
" That we
speak of, to signify what oiu- very bodies
body." [p. 1091]. Again, through mystical conjunction receive
are commingled {avaKepa<TQo3p.iv) into from that vital efficacy which we know
that flesh, not merely through love, to be in His, and from i)odi]y mixtures
but really, is brought about by means they boiTow divers similitudes rather
of that food which He has bestowed to declare the truth than the manner
upon us." Hom. in Joann. 46. 3. [p. 399 of coherence between His sacred and
O.T.] And so S. Cyril writes against the sanctified bodies of saints." Eccl.
Nestorius: "Since we have proved that Pol. V. 56. § 10. But without some ex-
Christ is the Vine, and we branches as planation of this nature, language such
adhering to a communion with Him, as S. Athanasius's in the text seems a
not spiritual merely but bodily, why mere matter of words, vid. infr. §50 fin.
The Word not cuiointecl, and so God; hut God, and so anointed. 251
Disc, the anointing which took place in Him, and of the incarnate
:— presence of the Word ^j which the Psalmist foreseeing, cele-
brates, first His Godhead and kingdom, which is the Father's,
Ps. 45,5. in these tones, Tluj throne, God, is for ever and ever ; a
sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of Thy Kingdom ; then,
lb. 8. announces His descent to us thus. Wherefore God, even Thy
God, hath anointed Thee with tlte oil
of gladness above Thy
felloius.
§ 50.
'^- What is there to wonder at, what to disbelieve, if the
Lord who gives the Spirit, is here said Himself to be anoint-
ed with the Spirit, at a time when, necessity requiring it. He
did not refuse in respect of His manhood to call Himself in-
ferior to the Spirit ? For the Jews saying that He cast out
devils in Beelzebub, He answered and said to them, for the
Matt. 12, exposure of their blasphemy. But if I through the Spirit of
God cast out devils. Behold, the Giver of the Spirit here says
that He cast out devils in the Spirit; but this is not said,
8 This phrase
evffapKos irapovcria. went on to say, that tlie proper power
which has occurred above, § 8. p. 190, or virtue of the Son extends over ra-
is very frequent with Atlian. vid. infr. tional natures alone, e. g. heathens,
§ 53, 59, 62 fin. ii. 6, 10, 55, 66 twice, but that of the Spirit only over Chris-
72 fin. iii. 28, 35. Incarn. 20. Sent. D. tians ; those then who sin against the
9. Ep. JEe;. 4. Scrap, i. 3, 9. vid. also
Son or their reason, have a remedy in
Cvril. Catech. iii. 11. xii. 15. xiv. 27, Christianity and its baptism, but no-
30. Epiph. Hser. 77. 17. The Eut}'- thing remains for thosewho sin against
chians avail themselves of it at the the Spu-it. But Theognostus, refer-
" I have
Council of Constantinople, vid. Hard, ring to the text, many things
Cone. t. 2. pp. 164, 236. to say but ye cannot bear them now ;
*
He enters into the explanation of howbeit when He, the Spirit of Truth,"
this text at some length in Scrap, iv. &c. argued tliat to sin against the Son
8. &c. Origen, he says, and Theo- was to sin against inferior light, but
Men receive the Spirit through His flesh. 253
man but to tlie disciples shewing His Godhead and His ^^Y'
;
Holy Ghost, and I send Him, and He shall glorify Me, and jj^'^g ^^
Whatsoever He heareth,that He shall speak. As then in this 14.
place the Lord Himself, the Giver of the Spirit, does not
refuse to say that through the Spirit He casts out devils, as
man ; in like manner He the same, the Giver of the Spirit,
refused not to say. The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because Is. 61, 1.
^^^^ ^•
I'eceived for its sake, we have the sequel of the Spirit's grace,
Disc, need of one unalterable, tliat men miglit have tlie im-
doctorem niisit, quasi vivam legem, and this had gone on without limit,
Lactant. Instit. iv. 25. "The Only-be- and men had remained under guilt
gotten was made man like us,. ... as just as before, being in slavery to sin ;
if lending us His own stedfastness." and ever sinning, they had ever needed
Cyril, in Joann. lib. V. 2. p. 473 [p. 549 pardon, and never been made free,
O.T.] vid. also Thesaur. 20. p. 198. being in themselves carnal, and ever
;
Father's, the Son^s also, if He has not the unalterableness vid. John
and unchaugeableness of the Father ^ ? Not as being subject 17, 10.
^
to laws ™, and as influenced this way and that, does He love P.*
^
'
hatest all them that worlc iniquity ; and. The Lord loveth the g'
x
ting these as those, they will conceive that the Father too
is alterable. But, since the very hearing others say this is
not without peril, we do well to think that God is said to love
trary, selecting one thing and not choosing another, for this
belongs to things generated, but that, as a judge. He loves
and takes to Him the righteous and withdraws from the bad.
It follows then to think the same concerning the Image of
God also, that He loves and hates no otherwise than thus.
For such must be the nature of the Image as is Its Father,
though the Arians in their blindness fail to see either that
Image or any other truth of the divine oracles. For being
forced from the conceiations or rather misconceptions ° of
their own hearts, they fall back upon passages of divine
""
Eunoniius said tliat our Lord was necessity." contr. Kunoin. ii. 30.
" "
utterly separate from tlie Father, by ivi/oiwv ^naWov Se irapavoiuiv. vid.
p.
natural law," i'6fj.(f> (pvaews ; S. Basil 237, note d. And so kot' iwivoiav, a\.
" as if the God of all had not Ao yuoAAoV ia-riv air6yoia, Orat. ii. 38
observes, §
power over Himself, lauroC Kvpios, but [infra p. 333] .
°
233, note a. p. 257,
iSiav. vid. p. which they make the whole contro-
ref. 5. KaKovoLwv, Orat. 11. § 18
Idiuip versy turn. Vid. Socrates's account of
[Infra p. 307] Insteadof prefesslng
. to Arlus's commencement, " If God has
examine Scripture or to acquiesce in a Son, he must have a beginning of
what they had been taught, the Arians existence." &c. &c. and so the word
were remarkable for insisting on cer- a^efTjroV.
tain abstract positions or Inferences on
CHAP. XTII.
whom ye have crucified both Lord and Christ^. These pas- ^^'id.
_
*
they known the person, and the subject, and the season of""'
the Apostle's words, they would not have expounded of
Christ's divinity what belongs to His manhood, nor in their
beginning of this passage. For the Apostle says, God ivho Heb.l, 1.
^•
at sundry times and divers manners spake in times past unto
the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto
us by His Son ; then again shortly after he says, luhen He lb. 3, 4.
Disc, was spoken by Angels, while tlie Son too came on earthy
— '.
and that in order to minister, he was forced to add, Become
SO much better than the Angels, wishing to shew that, as much
as the son excels a servant, so much also the ministry of
the Son is better than the ministry of servants. Contrast-
ing then the old ministry and the new, the Apostle deals
freely ^vith the Jews, writing and saying, Become so much
better than the Angels. This is why throughout he uses no
comparison, such as "become greater,^' or "more honour-
able," lest we should think of Him and them as one in kind^,
1
oixoye-
^
p. 169.
^^^ is his word, by way of marking the difference of
better
the Son^s nature from things generated. And of this we
-
(cpeiT-
perlor or
kave proof from divine Scripture; David, for instance, say-
above.
{^ic^ \^ thePsalm, One dat/
^ in Thii courts is better than a
.'
Ps 84 '
Prov. 8, ^j^^ ^iQf silver, and knowledge rather than choice ^gold. For
10. 11. . . . .
ivisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may
be desired are not to be compared to it. Are not wisdom and
3
irepo- stones of the earth different in substance ^ and separate * in
ovffia
nature ? Are heavenly courts at all akin to earthly houses ?
Or is there any similarity between things eternal and spiri-
tual, and things temporal and mortal ? And this is what
Is. 56, Esaias says. Thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep
^" ^'
My sabbaths, and choose the things that please Me, and take
hold of My Covenant ; even unto them ivill I give in Mine
house, and within My tualls, a place and a name better than
of sons and of daughters I will give them an everlasting
:
dia<i>opa
over things generated, calling the one Son, the other ser-
vants ; the one, as a Son with the Father, sitting on the
rio'ht;and the others, as servants, standing before Him,
§ 56. and being sent, and fulfilling office's. Scripture, in speak-
ing thus, implies, Arians, not that the Son is generate,
but rather other than things generate, and proper to the
Father, being in His bosom.
He hecame better, that is, came to he tJiroayh generation. 261
Disc, recognises ; for it not only says in the case of things gene-
—
L
'
rate, All things came to he through Him, and without Him
Ps. 104, there was not any thing made, and, In ivisdom hast Thou
24- made them all ; but in the case of sons also which are gene-
Job 1, 2. rate. To Joh there came seven sons and. three daughters, and.
Gen. 21, Abraham was an hundred years old ivhen there came to him
Isaac his son ; and Moses said, If to any one there come sons.
Therefore since the Son is other than things generate, alone
the proper offspring of the Father's substance, this plea of
the Arians about the word become is worth nothing.
5. If moreover, baffled so far, they should still violently
insist that the language is that of comparison, and that com-
'
ofj-o-
parison in consequence implies oneness of kind ^, so that the
p! 2^60,
Son is of the nature of Angels, they will in the first place
ref. 1. incur the disgrace of rivalling and repeating what Valentinus
held,and Carpocrates, and those other heretics, of whom the
former said that the Angels were one in kind with the Christ,
and Carpocrates that Angels are framers of the world^. Per-
chance it is under the instruction of these masters that they
5, 57. compare the Word of God with the Angels ; though surely
amid such speculations, they will be moved by the Psalmist,
Ps. 89, 7.
saying. Who is he among the gods that shall be like unto the
lb. 86, 8. Lord ? and. Among the gods there is none like unto Thee,
Lord. However, they must be answered, with the chance
of their profiting by it, that comparison confessedly does
belong to subjects one in kind, not to those which differ. No
one, for instance, would compare God with man, or again man
with brutes, nor wood with stone, because their natures are
unlike; but God is beyond comparison, and man is com-
and only argues that tliere is
KTia-fia, evident even from this passage, that
a sense of it in which it appUes
."f/jccirt/ though Athan. does not distinguish
to the Word, not as one of a number, between yevriThy and yevfr^rbu, yet he
as the Arians said, but solely, inconi- considers yeyiwrjireai or yevv7)ixa. as
niunicably, as being the juoi'oyei'lijs. In especially appropriate to the Son, 76-
the passage before us, which at fii-st yovevai and y€v6fi€vos to the creation,
seems to require the distinction, he '
These tenets and similar ones were
does but say, 1. that the Son is not common to many branches of the
yevrirhs or yewnrhs, "genera,te," i.e. Gnostics, who paid worship to the An-
in the general sense; 2. that He is gels, or ascribed to them the creation ;
generated, yeyev^aOat or yeyevvTJa-dai, the doctrine of their consubstantiality
as the fiovoyfV7)s ; 3. that the yivqra or with our Lord arose from their belief
yevurjTa (creatures) are called yevrira, in emanation. S. Athanasius here uses
or said yeyevvrjadai, as partaking of the theword dixoy€vris,not o/xooyo-ios which
yevvrirhs vl6s. 4. that (in themselves) was usual with them (vid. Bull D. F.
they are properly said yeyovivai or N. ii. 1. § 2) tis with the Manichees
TTiiroiriaQai. It may be admitted, as after them, Beausobre, Manich. iii. 8.
The Son not greater, hut better than
the Angels. 263
who speaks to the very point. For unto which of the Angels lb. 5. 7.
said jke at any time, Thou art Mij Son, this day have I
begotten Thee ? of the Angels He saith, Who maheth
And
His Angels spirits, and His ministers aflame of fire. Observe § 58.
here, the word made belongs to things generate, and he
calls them things made ; but to the Son he speaks not of
Disc, the Son, Thou remainest, to sliew His eternity; for not
liaving tlie capacity of perisliing, as things generate have, but
'-
needing the visitation of the Word, as Paul hath said; but j^'j^j^ ^7
that visitation has perfected the work of the Father. And 4.
^'
then, from Adam unto Moses death reigned; bat the pre- 14*^™"
sence of the Word abolished death. And no longer in 2 Tim. l,
10
Adam are we all dying; but in Chi-ist we are all reviving. 1 Cor. 15
And then, from Dan to Bersabe was the Law proclaimed 22.
vid. Ps.
and in Judaea only was God known; but now, unto all the 76, 1.
earth has gone forth their voice, and all the earth has been
^"'^A^'q'
filled with the knowledge of God, and the
disciples have
made disciples of all the nations, and now is fulfilled what Matt. 28,
19
Part of this chapter, as for instance
''
places, as S. Leo, e.g. repeats himself
n. 7, 8. is much more finished in point in another controversy, .\tlian. is so
of style than the general course of his very eloquent and rich a writer vvhen-
Orations. It may be indeed only tlie ever he is led into comments upon
natural consequence of his warming Scripture, that one almost regrets he
with his subject, but this beautiful pas- had ever to adopt a controversial tone;
sage looks very much like an insertion, except indeed that Arianism has given
Some words of it are found in Sent, occasion to those comments, and that
I>. 11. written a few
years sooner. He that tone is of course a lesson of doc-
certainly transcribed himself in other trine to us, and therefore instructive.
266 The Son became surety, that is, when He became man.
Disc, jg shall be all God. And then what
John 6
— waswritten, They taught of
revealed, was but a type but now the ; truth has been
45. manifested. And this again the Apostle himself describes
'
Heb. 7,
afterwards more clearly, saying, By so much ivas Jesus made
22- a surety of a better testament; and again. But now hath He
obtained a more excellent ministry, by hoiu much also He is
the Mediator of a better covenant, ivhich ivas established upon
lb. 7, 19. better promises. And, For the Law made nothing perfect,
but the bringing in of a better hope did. And again he says,
lb. 9, 23. It ivas therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the
heavens should be purified with these ; but the heavenly things
themselves ivith better sacrifices than these. Both in the
verse before us then, and throughout, does he ascribe the
word better to the Lord, who is better and other than gener-
ated things. For better is the sacrifice through Him, better
the hope in Him; and also the promises
through Him, not
merely as great compared with small, but the one differing
from the other in nature, because He who conducts this
economy, is better than things generated.
9- Moreover the words He is become^ surety denotes the
§ 60.
^yiyoviv
pledge in our behalf which He has provided. For as, being
made, the Word, He became fiesh, and become we ascribe to the
^Y' flesh, for it is generated and created, so do we here the
John
14.
,
1,
expression
.
He
,
is become,
,..-,.
expoundmg it according to a second
sense, viz. because He has become man. And let these
contentiousmen know, that they fail in this their perverse
purpose let them know that Paul does not signify that
;
"
p. 244, His substance ^ has become, knowing, as he did, that He is
Son and Wisdom and Eadiance and Image of the Father ;
but here too he refers the word become to the ministry of that
covenant, in which death which once ruled is abolished.
Since here also the ministry through Him has become better,
Rom. 8, in that ivhat the Law could not do in that it -iuas iveaJc
^'
through the fiesh, God sending His oivn Son in the like-
ness of sinful fiesh, and for sin condemned sin in the fiesh,
p 260
^o longer according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit,
note d. and say again and again, " But we are not in the flesh
The Son so on the Father's right, that the Father on the Son's. 267
but in the Spirit/' and^ " For tlie Son of God came into tlie Chap.
woi'ld, not to iudare the world, but to redeem all men, and 1^
V John
that the world might be saved through Him." Formerly the 3] 17.
world, as guilty, was under judgment from the Law; but
now the Word has taken on Himself the judgment, and
having suffered in the body for all, has bestowed salvation
to alP. With a view to this, hath John exclaimed. The laio lb. 1, 17.'
was given by Moses, hut grace and truth came hy Jesus Christ.
Better is grace than the Law, and truth than the shadow.
10. Better then, as has been said, could not have been § 61.
brought to pass by any other than the Son, who sits on the
right hand of the Father. And what does this denote but
the Son's genuineness^, and that the Godhead of the Father ^^ 7"'?-
'
is the same as the Son's ^? For in that the Son reigns in 2 „ 145^
His Father's kingdom, is seated upon the same throne as the "ote r.
Father, and is contemplated in the Father's Godhead, there-
fore is the Word God, and whoso beholds the Son, beholds
the Father; and thus there is one God. Sitting then on
the right, yet hath He not His Father on the left ™ ; but
whatever is right ^ and precious in the Father, that also the ^ S€^i6if
Son has, and says. All things that the Father hath are Mine. ^^- 1^»
Wherefore also the Son, though sitting on the right, also
sees the Father on the right, though it be as become man
that He says, Isaiv the Lord alivays before My face, for He is Ps. 16, 9.
on My right hand, therefore I shall not fall. This shews more-
over that the Son is in the Father and the Father in the
Son for the Father being on the right, the Son is on the
;
right ; and while the Son sits on the right of the Father,
the Father is in the Son. And the Angels indeed minister
ascending and descending; but concerning the Son he saith,
And let all the Angels of God worship Him. And when Hob. 1,6.
'
vid.Incarn. passim. Theod.Eranist. Ep. 28, 5.
iii. —
pp. 196 198, &c. &c. It was the "Nee ideo tamen quasi humana
tendency of all the heresies concerning forma circumscriptum esse Deum
tlie I'erson of Christ to explain away Patrem arbitrandum est, ut de illo
or deny tlie Atonement. The Arians, cogitantibus dextrum aut sinistrum
after the Platonists, insisted on the latus aiiimo occurrat ; aut id ipsuui
pre-existing Priesthood, as if the incar- quod sedens Pater dicitur, flexis popli-
nation and crucifixion were not of its tibus fieri putandum est, ne in illud
essence. The Apollinariaiis resolved incidamus sacrilegiuni, &c. August, de
the Incarnation into a manifestation. Fid. et Symb. 14 [Short treatises, p. 25
Theod. Eran. i. The Nestorians de- O.T.]. Does this passage of Athan.'s
nied the Atonement, Procl. ad Armen. slu-wthat the Anthropomorphites were
p. 615. And the Eutychians, Leont. stirring in Egypt already?
268 The word " become^' marks the incarnation and ministry.
Disc. Angels minister, they say, '^I am sent unto thee/^ and/' The
L Lord has commanded;" but the Son, though He say in
Jolini;,
human fashion, "I am sent," and comes to finish the work
4- and to minister, nevertheless says, as being Word and
'
1
p. 229,
abideth in Me, He doeth the ivorhs; for what we behold in
note g. i}^2X Image, are the Father's works.
11. What has been already said ought to prevail with those
persons who are fighting against the very truth ; however,
if, because it is written, become better, they refuse to explain
" has been
become, as used of the Son, to be generated and
is ";" or again as referring to the better covenant having
come to be ", as we have said, but consider from this ex-
pression that the Word is called generate, let them hear the
same again in a concise form, since they have forgotten
what has been said. If the Son be in the number of the
§62.
Angels, then let Him as to them,
the word become apply to
and let Him from them in nature but be
not differ at all ;
things;
and let them acknowledge that it is indicative of
His ministry and the economy which came to pass.
12. But how He became better in His ministry, being
° Of His divine
nature, n. 4. — n. 8.
° and
Of His liuman nature, n. 9. 10.
Tlie Son hecame, as God becomes a defence. 269
better in nature tlian things generate, appears from what has Chap.
. . • Y Til •
been said before, which, I consider, is sufficient in itself to
put them to shame. But if they carry on the contest, it
est save me. And again. The Lord became a defence for lb. 9, 9.
the oppressed, and the like which are found in divine Scrip-
ture. If then they apply these passages to the Son, which
13. But if they refer these passages to the Father, will § 63.
they, when it is here also written, " Become" and ^'^He be-
came," venture so far as to affirm that God is generate ?
Yea, they will dare, as they thus argue concerning His
Word for the course of their argument carries them on to
;
so also here the having hecome better than the Angels, and. Chap.
Note It was observed p. 61, note d. that there were two clauses in the
ON Nicene Anathema which required explanation. One of them, i^ hipa<i
"^^^'
'
{iTTocTTacrews r} oicrtas, has been discussed in the Note, pp. 66 72 — ;
Thus
S. Hippolytus
says, Notb
oe yu'ofxevtov
Toil'
dp^rjyov kol (TvfJifiovXov koX ipyarrfv iylwa \6yov,
on
ov Aoyov €^wv iv iavrQ aoparov re ovra tw KTi^o/Jievio Kocrixw, oparov A^isc.
TTOtet-
TTpoTtpav (jioivrjv (jideyyofx.evo';, kol (fiws e/< <^arros yewwv, 7rporJK€v
—
'
Ei|^(ov ovv 6 deos rov kavrov \6yov ivSidOiTov cv Tois tStots cTTrAay^'ots,
eyiwrjcrev avTov p.€Td r^s iavrov <To</)tas i^ep€v^dui€vo<; irpo tuju oAwv
.... OTTore 06 rjOeXrjcrei' 6 Oeos TrourjcraL oaa ij3ovXeiicraTo, rovrov rov
Trdo'rjs KTio-ews. ad Autol. 10
—
Aoyov iyiwrjae TTpo<j>opiKov,iTp(m6roKOv
22.
ii.
—
Bishop Bull, Defens. F. N. iii. 5 8, meets this representation by
maintaining that the yhnnqcn'; which S. Hippolytus and other writers
spoke of, was but a metaphorical generation, the real and eternal
truth being shadowed out by a succession of events in the
Economy
of time, such as is the Resurrection (Acts xiii. 33),
nay, the Nativity ;
and that of these His going forth to create the worlds was one. And
he maintains (ibid. iii. 9) that such is the mode of speaking adopted
by the Fathers after the Nicene Council as well as before. And then
he adds, (which is our present point,) that it is even alluded to and
recognised in the Creed of the Council, which anathematizes those
who say that " the Son was not before His generation," i. e. who deny
that " the Son was before His generation,^' which statement accord-
ingly becomes indirectly a Catholic truth.
I am not aware whether
any writer has preceded or followed this '
verum ingenue fatear, animum meum sane nuUus dubito, quin hoe pronun-
subiit admiratio, quid effato isto, datum Arianorum oppositum fuerit
'
Filius priusquam nasceretur, non Catholicorum istorum sentential, qui
erat,' sihi voluerint Ariani. De nati- docerent, Filium quidem paulo ante
vitate Christi ex beatissima Virgine conditum mundum inexplicabili quo-
dictum non esse exponendum constat, dam modo ex Patre progressum fuisse
. .
Itaque de nativitate Filii loquun-
. ad constituendum universa," &c. D. F.
tur, quae hujus universi creationem N. iii. 9. § 2.
274 Note on " He was not before Sis generation "
and He was not before His generation,' they hit upon this word
'
Ingenerate, that, by saying among the simple that the Son was gene-
'
rate, thei/ might impli/ the very same phrases out of nothing and
'
'
He once was not.' " Here he does not in so many Mords say that
in the Nicene Anathema. 275
the arisfument from the ayiv-qrov was a substitute for the ovk tjv irpiv Note
ycwqOrjvai, yet surely it is not unfair so to understand him. But it ox
Disc.
])lain that the ayevT^Tov was brought forward merely to express by
is
" he who is
language is begotten has a beginning of existence," is in
the Nicene Anathema, ovk r/v Trplv yeviTjOrjvai, but in S. Alexander's
circular, 6 cov ^eos tov prj ovra Ik tov /jlt] ovtos TrcTrotT^/cev. The ab-
sence of the ovk rjv TTplv, &c. in S. Alexander is certainly remarkable.
Moreover the two formulse are treated as synonymous by Greg. Naz.
Orat. 29. 9. Cyril, Thesaur. 4. p. 29 fin. and by Basil as quoted
below. But indeed there is an internal correspondence between
them, shewing that they have but one meaning. They are really but
the same sentence in the active and in the passive voice.
5. A number of scattered passages in Athanasius lead us to the
same conclusion. For instance, if the Arian formula had the sense
which is here maintained, of being an argument against our Lord's
eternity, the Catholic answer would be, "He could not be before
His generation because His generation is eternal, as being from the
Father." Now this is precisely the language Athanasius uses, when
it occurs to him to introduce the words in Thus in Orat.
question.
" The creatures
ii.
§ 57 [infra p. 363], he says, began to come to be
(ytveo-^at) ; but the AVord of God, not having beginning {apxr}v) of
being, surely did not begin to be, nor begin to come to be, but was
always. And the works have a beginning (upxqv) in the making, and
the beginning precedes things which come to be ; but the Word not
being of such, rather Himself becomes the Framer of those things
Avhich have a beginning. And the being of things generate is mea-
sured by their becoming (cv tw yivea-dai), and at some beginning
(origin) doth God begin to make them through the Word, that it may
be known that they were not before their generation {Trplv yeviadai) ;
but the Word hath His being in no other origin than the Father" (vid.
276 Note on " He was not before His generation''
'
may indeed properly be said of creatures that they were not before
their generation.'" And so again when he says, "if the Son was
"
not before His generation, Truth was not always in God supr. §
20. p. 209 ; he does not thereby imply that the Son was before His
generation, but he means, "if it be true that, &c." "if the formula
" if it can be said of the "
Son, He was not, &c.'
'
holds," Accord-
ingly, shortly afterwards, in a passage already cited, he says the same
of the Almighty Father in the way of parallel ;
" God who
is, hath
He so become, whereas He was not, or is He too before His gene-
"
ration .? (§ 25. p. 210) not implying here any generation at all, but
urging that the question and irrelevant, that the formula is
is idle
unmeaning and does not apply cannot be said of. Father or Son.
to,
7. Such an explanation of these passages, as well as the view
here taken of the formula itself, receive abundant confirmation from
S. Gregory Nazianzen and S. Hilary. What has been maintained is,
that when S. Athanasius says,
" if the Son is not before His
genera-
" if it can be " if the
tion, then, 8cc." he does but mean, said," words
can be used or applied in this case." Now the two Fathers just
mentioned both decide that it is not true, either that the Son teas
in the Nicene Anathema. 277
before His generation, or that He was not ; in other words, that the Note
on
question is mimeaning and irrelevant, which is just the interpretation
Disc,
which has been here given to Athanasius. But again, in thus speak-
ing, they thereby assert also that they did not hold, that they do not
'- —
allow, that formula which Bull considers the Nicene Fathers defended
and sanctioned, as being Catholic and in use both before the Council
and " He was before His generation." Thus S.
after, viz. Gregory
in the passage in which he speaks of
"
did He that is make Him
" before His
that is not, &c." and generation, &c." as one and tlie
"
same, expressly says, In His case, to be begotten is conctirrent with
existence and is from the beginning," and that in contrast to the in-
" He who
stance of men ; who, he says, do fulfil in a manner is, &c."
Note and says, since He has been generated, He was not before His
ON generation, Trpo ttjs ycvv?^cr€ojs," contr. Eiinom. ii. 14. And he solves
the objection as the other Fathers, by saying that our Lord is from
^^^*^*
—— ^
everlasting, speaking of S. John, in the first words of his Gospel, as
T17 aiSioTrjTL Tov Trarpos tov /xovoyevov'S avvd-n-TMv j^v yiwqcnv. § 15.
siofiis respectu ipsum tov Xoyov a Deo Patre quasi natnin fuisse
et omnis creatiu'se primogenitutn in Scripturis dici confess! sunt."
D. F. N. iii. 9. § 1. Now 1 consider that S. Athanasius does not,
as this sentence says, vmderstand by primogenitus that our Lord was
" a Deo Patre nahisJ''' He does not
progressionis respectu quasi
seem to me
speak of a generation or birth of the Son at all,
to
though figurative, but of the birth of all things, and that in Him.
I'hat Athanasius does not call the avyKaTdfiaats of the Word
a birth, as denoted by the term TrpojTOTOKos, is plain from his
own avowal in the passage to which Bull refers. " No where
" is He called
in the Scriptures," he says, tt/dwtotokos tov @eov,
born of God, nor creature of God, but Only-begotten, AVord,
first
Him." ii. 62 [infra p. 369]. Here surely he expressly denies Bull's Note
statement that " first-horn
"
means "a Deo natus, " " born of God." on
Such additions as Trapa tov Trarpos, he says, are reserved for //.ovoyev^s ^'®<^'
and Adyos. —
He goes on to say ivhat the term TrpwroTOKos does mean viz. ;
Note of a yewrjcri? at all in his account of creation, but simply calls the Son
ON TrpwTov yivvrjixa, i. e.
TrpwroTvirov yevvrjixa.
Disc Nor does Tatian approach nearer to the doctrine of a yivvrja-i^.
I
He says that at the creation the Word epyov TrpunoTOKov tov Trarpos
yiveraf tovtov 'iafJiev tov ad Grsec. 5. Here the word
Kocr/Jiov rrjv apyrjv.
CHAP. XIV.
TEXTS EXPLAINED ; FOURTHLY, HEBREWS ill. 2.
" "
passage, which explains the word faithful as meaning trustworth}^
as do 1 Pet. iv. fin. and other texts. On the whole made may safely
be understood either of the divine generation or the human creation.
^
and their own mire, even invent new expedients for their orat'.'iii.
irreligion. Thus they misunderstand the passage in the ]^,-
Proverbs, The Lord hath created Me a heg inning of His Prov. 8,
ways for His uvrks *, and the words of the Apostle, Who was ^^^ 3
faithful to Him that made Him, and straightway' argue, that 2.
the Son of God is a work and a creature. But although they p. 057.
might have learned from what is said above, had they not '"^''*_-,
utterly lost their power of apprehension, that the Son is not a-KKws
»
Disc,
work, and it is impious to call Him a creature, and it is of
John 1,
1.
If He he Son and Image, icliy bring texts as objections ? 283
U 2
284 A So)i isimjyliedin the idea of creation, for if is through Him
Disc, j^ot fruitful itself®, but barren, as they hold, as a light that
lightens not, and a dry fountain, are they not ashamed to speak
of His possessing framing energy ? and whereas they deny what
isby nature, do they not blush to place before it what is by
J3^^ if jje frames things that are external to Him and
1
Orat. ^{^ 1
p
'
&c, before were not, by willing them to be, and becomes their
Maker, much more will He first be Father of an Offspring from
His proper Substance. For if they attribute to God the willing
about things which are not, why recognise they not that in
God which lies above the will ? now it is a something that sur-
passes will, that He should be by nature, and should
be Father
of His proper Word. If then that which comes first, which
is according to nature, does not exist, as they would have it in
their folly, how can that which is second come to be, which is
according to will ? for the Word is first, and then the creation.
4. On the contrary the AVord exists, whatever they affirm,
be, and God, as being Maker, plainly hath also His framing
"Word, not external, but proper to Him for this must be ;
—
repeated. If He has the power of will, and His will is
2
jroiijTi- gffggtive and suffices for the consistence of the things that
",
hT' r '>
infr. 28.
doubt, that He who disposes is prior to the disposition and
the things disposed. And thus, as I said, God's creating is
second to His begetting for Son implies something proper
;
but what from His will, comes into consistence from with-
is
'o!^; extravagance who say that the Lord is not Son of God, but
note k. a work, and it follows that we all of necessity confess that
e For KapiroySvos v ovaia, vid. supr. p, 609. b. Vid. the yivvijais and the
p. 25, note yivv-qTiKhs, Orat. iii. 6G.
e. ktiVis contrasted together, Orat. i. 29.
iv. 4. tin. &.yovos, \. 14. fin. and Sent. vid. supr. p. 18, note o. p. 153. note c.
Dion. 15. 19. r) (pvaiK)) 'yovifjL6T-r)s, The doctrine in the text is shortly ex-
Damasc. F. O. i. 8. p. 133. aKapnos, pressed, infr. Orat. iv. 4 tin. el ayovos
Cyr. Thes. p. 45. Epiph. Hser. 05. koI aixpepyrjros.
If Scripture teach'uig plain, why urge terms and phrases ? 285
her words to David, Solomon thy servant. Nor did they ver. 2G.
care for calling the son a servant, for while David heard it,
he recognised the "nature," and while they spoke it, they
"
forgot not the genuineness," praying that he might be
made his father's heir, to whom they gave the name of
servant ;
for he to David was son by nature.
6. As then, when we read this, we interpret it fairly, without §. 4
accounting Solomon a servant because we hear him so
called, but a son natural and genuine, so also, if, concerning
the Saviour, who is confessed to be in truth the Son, and to
be the Word by nature, the sacred writers say, Who was
faithful to Him that made Him, or if He say of Himself,
286 If our Lord is called a servant, so is Solomon, though a Son.
Disc. The Lord created Me, and, / am Thy servant and the Son
II.
Ps. 116,
of Thine handmaid, and the like, let not any on this account
He to the Father and from Him but, as
^
16-.
'
deny that is proper ;
TTjU fK
TOV IT.
in the case of Solomon and David, let them have a right
lSl6TT]Ta idea of the Father and the Son. For if, though they hear
Solomon called a servant, they acknowledge him to be a son,
are they not deserving of many deaths \ who, instead of pre-
servant, so, to repeat what was said above, although parents Chap.
and " becoming," for all this they do not deny their nature.
Thus Ezekias, as is written in the book of Esaias, said in
his prayer. From this day I will make children, tcho shall Is. 38,
He '" '^^
'
/
'
said, have gotten. Nor would any one consider, because '
has said in the Law, If sons become to any one, and. If he ^ 21.
make a son. Here again they speak of those who are § 5.
heresy, but rather condemns it. For it has been shewn that
e That is, while the style of Scrip- Fidei the principle of interpretation,
ture justifies us in thus interjireting the and accordingly he goes on at once to
word "made," doctrinal truth obliges apply it. vid. supr. p. 283, note c. infr.
us to do so. He considers the Regula p. 341, note h.
288 Our Lord not a work, for He judges, not is judged.
ggj,^ jy though late in the day, after what has been said, to disown
4- c. their irreligious thoughts, and think of the Lord as of a true
iii. 62 Son, Word, and Wisdom of the Father, not a work, not a
!°l*' creature. For if the Son be a creature, by what word then ' ->
infr. p. ^
311, and by what wisdom was He made Himself^? for all the
Ps.^04 works were made through the Word and the Wisdom, as it
24. is written. In wisdom hast Thou made them all, and All things
'
3. tcere made by Him, and Him was not any tiling made.
xcithout
rather is Himself the Judge of works one and all, is not the
proof clearer than the sun, that the Son is not a work but the
"Faithful,'" not as Jtavinrj faith, hut as claiming it
of others. 289
Father's Word, in whom all the works both come to be and Chap.
Paul for writing, God is faithful, who tvill not suffer you to vid.Apoc.
be teinpted above that ye are able. But when the sacred
^''^j
writers spoke thus, they were not thinking of God in a i Cor.
human way, but they acknowledged two senses of the word '
God faithful, for, as David says in the Psalm, The Lord is '^^^^^,
' '
''
Disc, and from the single expression He made, may shew that they
err in thinking that the Word of God is a work. But further,
1
opeh
infr.
note.
2
43.
kxoyiav
. ...
since the drift also of the context is orthodox', shewing the
time and the relation to which this expression points, I
to shew from it also how the heretics lack reason
"
o
ought
'
viz. bv ;
3 KaQolov — but as
signifjdng His descent '
to mankind and High-
*
p. 268. priesthood which did become *, as —
one may easily see from
the account given of the Law and of Aaron.
12. I mean, Aaron was not born a high-priest, but a
man and in process of time, when God willed, he became a
;
Exod. 29, b}' ordinary garments, but putting over them the
his
Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God ;
but when the Father willed that ransoms should be paid for
all and to all grace should be given, then truly the Word, as
Aaron his robe, so did He take earthly flesh, having Mary
for the Mother of His Body as if virgin earth', that, as a
i
auepydaTov yris is an allusion to and so Trenseus, Haer. iii. 21. tin.
Adam's formation from the ground ;
and TertuIJian " That Virgin Earth,
;
As Aaron teas made Priest, so our Lord was "made.^' 291
not yet watered by rains, nor impreg- against Nestorianism, which in con-
nated by showers, from which man was sequence may be abused to the pur-
formed in the beginning, from which poses of the opposite heresy. Such ex-
Christ is now born according to the pressions as TT^piTidiixivos Ti)v iff6r}Ta,
flesh from a Virgin." adv. Jud. 13. vid. iKaXvTTTfTo, fvSvcrdufvos aSifxa, were
de Carn. Christ. 17- Ex terra virgine familiar with the Apollinarians, against
Adam, Christus ex virgine. Ambros. whom S. Alhanasius is, if possible,
in Luc. lib. iv. 7- vid. also the parallel even more decided. Theodoret objects
drawn out Serm. 147- App. S. August, Hser. V. 11. p. 422. to the word irpoKoi-
and in Proclus Orat. 2. pp. 103, 4. ed. AnyUjua, as applied to our Lord's man-
Ifi30. vid. also Chrysost. t. 3. p. 113. hood, as implying that He had no soul ;
ed. Ben. and Theodotus at Ephesus, vid. also Naz. Ep. 102 fin.
(ed. 1840.)
" O earth unsown, yet bearing a salu- In Naz. Ep. 101. p. !)0. TrapaTreVacr^a
tary fruit,O Virgin, who surpassedst is used to denote an
Apollinarian idea.
the very Paradise of Eden, &c." Cone. Such expressions were taken to imjily
Eph. p. 4. (Hard. t. i. p. I(i43.) And that Christ was not in nature ma7i, only
so Pioclus again, " She, the flowering in some sense human ; not a substance,
and incorruptible Paradise, in whom but an appearance; yet S. Atiian. (if
the Tree of Life, &c." Orat. C p. Athan.) contr. Sabi-ll. Greg. 4. has
227. And Basil of Seleucia, " Hail, napaTTeiriTaaixiv7]v and KaKv^fia, ibid,
full of grace, the amarantine Paraiise init. Cyril Hieros. KaTaneTa(Tfj.a,
S.
of Purity, in whom the Tree ot Life, Caterh. xii. 2G. xiii. 32. after Hebr.
&c." Orat. in Annunc. p. 215. and 10, 20. and Athan. ad Adelph. 5. e.
" Theodor. irapaTT4Tafffxa, Eran. 1. p. 22.
p. 212. Which, think they, is the
harder to behevc, that a virgin womb and irpoKdXvufj.a, ibid. p. 23. and adv.
should be with ciiild, or tlie ground Gent. vi. p. 877- and aToXij, Eran. I.e.
should be animated ?" &c. And lle- S. Leo has raro Christi velamen, Ep.
sychius, "Garden unsown, Paradise of 5!).
p. f)'i'd. vid. also Serm. 22. p. 70.
immortality." Bibl. Patr. Auctar. t. 2. Serm. 25. p. JJ4.
pp. 421, 423. Af^yos cVti. vid. supr. p. 240. rcf.
'
?T
•^
This is one of those distinct 4. drat. ii. 74. e. iii. .38 init. 39. b. 4 I
Lord did not become man °, that is a point for the Arians
™ The Arians considered that our heresies run into each other, (one may
Lord's Priesthood preceded His In- even say,) logically. No doctrines were
carnation, and belonged to His Divine apparently more opposed, whether his-
Nature, and was in consequence the torically or ethically, than the Arian
token of an inferior divinity. The and the ApoUinarian or Monophysite ;
notice ot it therefore in this text did nay, in statement, so far as the former
but contirra them in their interpretation denied that our Lord was God, the
of the words made, ^'c. For the Arians, latter that He was man. But their
vid. Epiph. Hser. 69,37- Eusebius too agreement lay in this compromise, that,
" He was
neither God
had distinctly declared, Qui videbatur, strictly speaking,
erat agnus Dei qui occultabatui-, sa-
;
nor man. In this passage Athan. hints
cerdos Dei." advers. Sabell. i. p. 2. b. that if the Arians gave the titles (such
vid. also Demonst.
10. p. 38. iv. 16.
i. as Priest) which really belong to our
to battle but if the TTonl became flesh, what ought to have Chap.
;
been said concerning Him when become man, but Who icas
Him that made Him ? for
faithful to as it is proper for the Word
to have it said of Him, In the heginning teas the Word, so it
and the passage is all about One and the Same. He writes 208, r. l.
' "''
then in the Epistle to the Hebrews thus Forasmuch then ;
^J^
as the children are ^jartakers of flesh and blood. He also Heb. 2,
He might destroy him that had the poioer of death, that is,
the devil; and deliver them u'ho through fear of death icere
all their lifetime subject to bondage. For rerily He took not
on Him the nature of Angels ; but He took on Him the seed
of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved Him to be
made like unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful
and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to
make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that
He Himself hath suffered being tempted. He is able to
succour them that are tempted. Wherefore, holy brethren,
partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Ajyostle and
High Priest of our profession, Jesus ; who teas faith-
ful to Him that made Him. Who can read this whole §.
9.
Eut. 10. denies the connexion, but nismi tradux," Thes. Ep. Lacro2. t. 3.
with very little show of reason. La p. 270.
Croze calls ApoUinarianism, "Aria-
294 He is faithful, as giving ground for faith,
Disc, made lihe,when He became man, having put upon Him our
'- — flesh. AVherefore Paul was writino' concerninor the Word's
human economy, when He said, Who was faithful to Him
that made Him, and not concerning His Substance. Have
not therefore any more the madness to say that the Word of God
is a work, whereas He is Son by nature
Only-begotten and ;
vid^'"infr.
^^^ mislead those who come to Him.
iii. 27. 14. This may be also learned from the Epistle of great Peter,
1 Pet. 4, who says, Let them that suffer according to the tcill of God,
commit their souls to a faithful Creator. For He is faithful
as not changing, but abiding ever, and rendering what He
15 18° that fail, and there is no faith in them. But the God of all,
Deut.
being J and indeed
o one really and true, '
is faithful,' who is ever
32 20.
Sept.
the same, and says. See now, that I, even I am He, and
'^ change not; and therefore His Son is faithful,
32 "30 being ever
Mai. 3, the same and unchanging, deceiving neither in His essence
nor in His promise —
as again says the Apostle writing to the
;
as other passages of Scripture shew. 295
that, even when made man, Jesus Christ is the same yesterday Heb. 13.
and to-day, and for ever is unchangeable. And as the
Apostle makes mention in his Epistle of His being made man
when mentioning His High Priesthood, so too he kept no long
silence about His Godhead, but rather mentions it forthwith,
as having Himself built it, and being its Lord and Framer,
and as God sanctifying it. For Moses, a man by nature,
became faithful, in believing God who spoke to him by His
Word; but" the Word was not as one of things generate in
° Here is a
protest beforehand against to operate in things beyond its own
the Monophysite doctrine, but such an- body, or to move by its presence what
ticipations of various heresies are too is far from the
body. Certainly man
frequent, as we proceed, to require or at a distance never moves or trans-
bear n(.tice. It is well known that the poses such things ;
nor could a man sit
illustration in the Athan. Creed, " As at home and think of things in heaven,
the reasonable soul and flesh is one and thereby move the sun, or turn the
man, so God and man is one Christ," heaven round .... Not thus is the
was taken by the Monophysites to Word of God in man's nature for ;
imply that the Divine Nature was made He is not implicated in the body, but
dependent on the flesh, and was in- rather He hath Himself dominion over
fluenced and circumscribed by it. Man it, so that He was not in it only but
is partly soul and
partly body he is of ; in all things; nay. He was external to
body and soul, not body and soul but ; the whole universe and in the sole
Christ is wholly God, and wholly man. Father." Incarn. V. D. I7. The same
0A.0S Qihs, oKos dudpcoTTos, infr. Orat.
passage occurs in Serm. Maj. de Fid.
iv. 35. a. He is as simply God as if 11. It is remarkable that the Mono-
He were not man, as simply man as if physites should have been forced into
He were not God; unus atque idem their circumscription of the Divine
est, says S. Leo, et totus hominis Nature, considering that Eutyches their
fihus propter carnem, et totus Dei Patriarch began with asserting for •
filius propter unam cum Patre deitatem. reverence-sake that the Incarnate Word
Ep. 165, 8. Athan. has anticipated was not under the laws of human na-
the heresy which denied this doctrine ture, vid. supr. p. 243, note i. This
in a very distinct passage written is another instance of the
appa- running of
rently before the rise even of Arianism. opposite heresies into each other, supr.
" It is the
function of the soul," he p. 292, note n. Another remarkable
" to
says, contemplate in its thoughts instance will be found infr. iii. 43. the
what is within its own body ;
but not Agnoetae, a sect of those very Euty-
"
296 " Made one of many words, used of our Lord as man.
12. c. 15. for the whole creature is the Word's servant", which by Him
^,^-
*'"
came and was made.
to be,
crwfji..
wordin every point of view, and shewn that the Son is not a work,
but in Substance indeed the Father's ofispring, while in the
Economy, according to the good pleasure of the Father, He
' ^
«aT' eu-
Orat. iii. was on our behalf made, and consists as man ? For this reason
64. init.
^]2en is it saidby the Apostle, Who teas faithful to Him that
made Him; and in the Proverbs, even creation is spoken of.
For so long as we are confessing that He became man, there
is no question about sa^ang, as was observed before, whether
" " "
He became," or He
has been made," or created," or
" " " "
formed," or servant," or son of an handmaid," or son
of man/' or " was constituted," or " took His journey," or
chians, who denied or tended to deny The Lutheran Ubiquism in like manner
our Lord's manhood with a view of pre- has contrived to unite a portion of
serving His divinity, being character- the opposite heresies of Nestorius and
ized by holding that He was ignorant. Eutyches.
CHAPTER XY.
TEXTS EXPLAINED ; FIFTHLY, ACTS ii. 36.
The Regula Fidei must be observed made applies to our Lord's man-
;
is relative to the Jews. Parallel instance in Gen. 27, 29, 37. The con-
text contradicts the Ai'ian interpretation.
Word with each work in particular; which they have well §.7.0,14!
nute c.
298 "Made" refers to the Word's flesh and to His manifestation
Disc, and not a work, and that such terms are not to be understood
of His Godhead, but the reason and manner of them investi-
before,
3 ottAwj nor that in general terms ^, but towards us, and in the midst
" He manifested Him."
of us, as much as to say, And
this has Peter himself, starting from this master doctrine
^
Acts 2, carefully expressed, when he said to them. Ye men of Israel,
^^'
hear these words ; Jesus of Nazareth, a man manifested of God
towards you by miracles, and wonders, and signs, ichich God
did hy Him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves Jcnow. Conse-
quently the term which he uses in the end, made, this He
has explained in the beginning by manifested, for by the
signs and wonders which the Lord did, He was manifested
to be not merely man, but God in a body and Lord also, the
Christ. Such also is the passage in the Gospel according
John 5, to John, Therefore the more did the Jeivs persecute Him,
' '
because He not only had broken the Sabbath, but said also
that God was His own Father, maJcing Himself equal icith
God. For the Lord did not then fashion Himself to be
God, nor indeed is a made God conceivable, but He mani-
John 10,
fested it by the Though ye believe not Me,
woi'ks, saying.
38. not
hdiere My worhs, that ye may know that I am in the Father,
letter. and the Father in Me. Thus then the Father has made Him
Lord and King in the midst of us, and towards us who were
once disobedient and it is plain that He who is now displayed
;
as Lord and King, does not then begin to be King and Lord,
but begins to shew His Lordship, and to extend it even over
the disobedient. If then they suppose that the Saviour was Chap.
not Lord and King, even before He became man and endured i>i
~'
the Cross, but then began to be Lord, let them know that
Lord, and Moses says. Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and Gen. 19,
tipon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven;
and David in the Psalms, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit^^- no,
Thou on My right hand; and. Thy Throne, God, is for ever p'g. 45^ 7.
and ever; a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of Thy
Kingdom; and, Thy Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom; it Ps. 1-15,
individual, the same sense hath the expression of Peter also, dl'fgnce
For the Son of God indeed, being Himself the Word, is §. 14.
Lord of all but we once were subject from the first to the
;
Disc,
fashioning for ourselves things that were not, we served, as
says the blessed Apostle, them which by nature are no Gods,
Gal. 4, 8. and, ignorant of the true God, we preferred things that were
not to the truth ;
but afterwards, as the ancient people, when
oppressed in Egypt, groaned, so, when we too had the Law
engrafted in us, and according to the unutterable sighings of
James 1, the Spirit made our intercession, Lord our God, take posses-
Rom. 8,
sion of i(s, then, as He becatne for a house of refuge and a God
f^'
Is.
„ and defence,
-^ '
so also He became our Lord. Nor did He then
26, ,
13.
begin to be, but we began to have Him for our Lord. For
^^ '
upon this God being good and Father of the Lord, in pit}",
and desiring to be known by all, makes His own Son put ou
Him a human body and become man, and be called Jesus,
that in this body offering Himself for all. He might deliver
all from false worship and corruption, and might Himself
it is that Peter means by. He hath made Him Lord, and hath
make Him man, but has made Him in order to His being
Lord of all men, and to His hallowing all through the Anoint-
ing. For though the Word existing in the form of God took
a servant's form, yet the assumption of the flesh did not
make a servant ^ of the Word, who was by nature Lord but ;
form been made Lord of all and Christ, that is, in order to 9."-'^^-
A. V •
hallow all by the Spirit. And as God, when becoming a
God and defence, and saying, I will he a God to them, does
not then become God more than before, nor then begins to
become God, but, what He ever is, that He then becomes
to those who need Him, when it pleaseth Him, so Christ
also being by nature Lord and King everlasting, does not
become Lord more than He was at the time He is sent forth,
nor then begins to be Lord and King, but what He is ever,
that He then is made according to the flesh
and, haviug ;
have these words of Peter as regards the Jews. For the Jews
have wandered from the truth, and expect indeed the Christ as
^
coming, but do not reckon that He undergoes a passion ^,
P- ^^^^
saying what they understand not We know that, when the John 12,
;
Christ cometh. He ahideth for ever, and how sayest Thou, that ^^'f^^^
He must he lifted up ? Next they suppose Him, not the Word letter
coming in flesh, but a mere ^ man, as were all the kings. The
^i\iv
^
God was come among them, saying. If He called them gods to John 10,
whom the word of God came, and the Scriptui'e cannot be
broken, say ye of Him ichom the Father liatli sanctified and
sent into the world. Thou hlasphemest, because I said, I am
the Son of God? Peter then, having learned this from the §. 16.
"
Saviour, in both points set the Jews right, saying, Jews,
the divine Scriptures announce that Christ cometh, and you
consider Him a mere man as one of David's descendants,
c vid. Rom.
1, 25. and so both text Vid. supr. p. 191.
Ep. JEg. 4. e. 1.3. c.
and application very frequently, e.g. note d. inlr. iii. KJ. note.
302 Christ the Scope of the Prophecies.
you say, but rather announces Him as Lord and God, and
Deut. 28, immortal, and dispenser of life. For Moses has said. Ye
^^'
shall see your Life hancjing before your eyes^. And David
Ps.no, in the hundred and ninth Psalm, The Lord said unto My
Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, till L make Thine enemies
Ps. 16,
Thy footstool; and in the fifteenth. Thou shall not leave My
soul in hell, neither shall Thou suffer Thy Holy One to see
coming was His own Lord. Nay you yourselves know that
He is dead, and His relics are with you.
7.
" That the Christ then must be such as the
Scriptures say,
you will plainly confess yourselves. For those announce-
ments come from God, and in them falsehood cannot be.
If then ye can state that such a one has come before, and
can prove Him God from the signs and wonders which He
did,ye have reason for maintaining the contest, but if ye are
not able to prove His coming, but are expecting Him still,
recognise the true season from Daniel, for his words relate
to the present time. But if this present season be that which
was of old afore-announced, and ye have seen what has taken
place among us, be sure that this Jesus, whom ye crucified,
this is the expected Christ. For David and the Prophets
all
are dead, and the sepulchres of all are with you, but that
Resurrection which has now taken place, has shewn that the
>
^Qaveiv scope
^
of these passages is Jesus. For the crucifixion is
Is. 53, 7.
denoted by Te shall see your Life hanging, and the wound
in the side by the spear answers to He was led as a sheep to
the slaughter, and the resurrection, nay more, the rising of
^ vid. Iren. Haer. iv. 10. 2. TertuU. also says, " Since things which are a
in Jud. 11. Cyprian. Testim. iii. 2. n. 20. regione of a place, are necessarily a
Lactant. Instit. iv. 18. Cyril Catech. little removed from it, it follows that
xiii. 19. August, contr. Faust, xvi. 22. nj30 signifies at the same time to be
which are referred to iu loc. Cypr. at a small distance," referring to the
(O. T.) To which add Leon. Serm. 59. who was but a bow-shot
case of Hagar,
6. Isidor. Hisp. contr. Jud. i. 35. ii. 6. from her child. Also, though the
Origen. in Cels. ii. 75. Epiph. Haer. word here is t<bn, yet nbn, which is
p. 75 Damasc. F. O. iv. 11. fin. This the same root, is used for hanging
interpretation is recommended even by on a stake, or crucifixion, e. g. Gen.
the letter, which has ^a:r: lb a-Kibn, 20, 19. Deut. 2], 22. Esth. 5, 14;
drreVafTi tcDi'
6<p9a\najv aou. Sept. 7i 10.
peudebit tibi a regioue. Gesen. who
It became the Word to take flesh, yet not he held by death. 303
the ancient dead from out their sepulchres, (for these most of
you have seen,) this is. Thou shalt not leave My soul in hell, j
—9^^^' „
'
flesh, and the Father called His Name Jesus, and so made
Him Lord and Christ, as much as to say, *He made
Him to rule and to reign that while at the Name of Jesus,
;'
may have some effect upon them, to find what the usage is of
divine Scripture. Now that Christ is everlasting Lord and
King, has become plain by what has gone before, nor is there
a man to doubt about it for being Son of God, He must be
;
'
p 312, like Him ', and being He is certainly both Lord and
like,
King, for He says Himself, He that hath seen Me, hath seen
the Father. On the other hand, that Peter's mere words. He
hath made Him both Lord and Christ, do not imply the Son
to be a creature, may be seen" from Isaac's blessing, though
2
afivSpa, this illustration is but a faint one for our subject. Now he
deer 12 '
. T
e_ said to Jacob, Become thou lord over thy brother; and to
Gen. 27,
Esau, Bchold, I have made him thy lord. Now thoujjh ^ the
"^
29. 37. . . ,
Tenipta-
in consequence of a like phrase even to things by
i^ot ascribe
tion.
nature generate, that they attach to the Son of God, saying
that He is a creature ? For Isaac Become and I have
said
^
made, signifying neither the coming into being nor the sub-
stance of Jacob ; (for after thirty years and more from his
birth he said this ;)
but his authority over his brother, which
came to pass subsequently.
§. 18. 10. Much more then did Peter say this without meaning that
the Substance of theWord was a work for he knew Him to be ;
Mat. 16, God's Son, confessing, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the
Living God; but he meant His Kingdom and Lordship which
was formed and came to be according to grace, and was re-
latively to us. For while saying this, he was not silent about the
s
Trarpi- Sou of God's cvcrlastiug Godhead which is the Father's* but ;
icrji
He had said already, that He had poured the Spirit on us ;
creature or work, but the Spirit is God's Gift^. For the Chap.
A. V.
creatures are hallowed by the Holy Spirit but the Son, in ;
"
things to the Father, and having all that is the Father's ^ y^^^nVr.
as He Himself has said ^ p. 31 1,
note 1.
3 vid.irifr.
g Qeov Swpov. And so more dis- dicitur VerbumDei, nisi Filius, nee note on
tinctly S. Basil, Swpou rov 0fov rh Donum Dei, nisi Spiritus Sanctus." Orat.iii.l.
TTvev/j.a. de Sp. S. 57- and more fre- And elsewhere, " Exiit, non qtiomodo * vid.
quently the later Latins, as in the natus, sed quomodo datus, et ideo non John 16,
" Altissimi Donura
Hymn, Dei;" and dicitur Filius." ibid. v. 15. making it, 15-
the earlier, e. g. Hil. de Trin. ii. 20. as Petavius observes, " His eternal
and August. Trin. xv. 2!). who makes it property, ut sic procedat, tanquam
the personal characteristic of the Third donabile, as being Love." Trin. vii. 13.
" non
Person in the Holy Trinity ; § 20.
CHAPTER XVI.
Arian formula, a creature but not as one of the creatures but eacb crea* ;
ture is unlike all other creatures and no creature can create. The
;
Word then differs from all creatures in that in which they, though
otherwise differing, all agree together, as creatures viz. in being an
;
Disc. 1. Now ill the next place let us consider the passage in the
*
'- — Proverbs,
'
T/te Lord created Me a beginning of His icays for
22. Sis works ^; although in shewing that the Word is no work,
it has been also shewn that He is no creature. For it is the
same to say work or creature, so that the proof that He is
no work is a proof also that He is no creature. Whereas one
may marvel at these men, thus devising excuses to be ir-
religious, and nothing daunted at the refutations which meet
them upon every point. For first they set about deceiving
the simple by their questions ^ " Did He who is make him
that was not or Him that was from Him who was not ?" and,
^
^
supr.
p 2J3
"Had you a son, before begetting him"?" And when this
-
eh. 8. had been proved worthless, next they invented the question,
" Is the "
^'ch. 9, Ingenerate one or two^ ? Then, when in this they had
p. 224.'
^ "We have found this test texts he handles, forming the chief
urged
against the Catholic doctrine in the subject of the Oration henceforth, after
third century to support an Ariau an introduction which extends down
doctrine, supr. p. 47, note b. Eusebius to 44.
Nicoraed. in his letter to Paulinus, ^ From the methodical manner in
adduces itagainst Alexander in the which the successive portions of his
very beginning of the controversy, foregoing Oration are here referred
Theod. Hist. i. 5. p. 752. Athan. says, would almost seem as if he were
to, it
supr. pp. 20, 21. that after this it was answering in course some A.rian work,
again put forward by the Arians about vid. also supra, pp. 233, 257- infr. Orat.
A.D. 350. It is presently explained at iii. 20. Hedoes not seem to be tracing
greater length than any other of the the controversy historically.
Evasions of the Ariam from first to last. 307
up this, next they set about saying, Being made so tnuch p. 23o.
^ '
better than the Angels and when the truth exposed this
; „
257.
they mean those very things over again, and are true to their
pp. 28 1,
created as well as Who teas faithful to Him that made Him* ; 4'ch. 14.
day ;
in the second the firmament in the third, gathering
;
together the waters. He bared the dry land, and brought out
the various fruits that are in it ;
and in the fourth. He made
the sun and the moon and all the host of the stars ;
and on
the fifth, He
created the race of living things in the sea, and
of birds in the air; and on the sixth. He made the quadrupeds
Rom. 1, on the earth, and at length man. And the invisible things
20
of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being
light is as the night, nor the sun as the moon nor the ;
whether our Lord was a true Son, or p, 211, note f.) 12. d. 23. a. 25. e. the
" Since word "real" was used as against ihejn,
only called Son. they whisper
something about Word and Wisdom as and in opposition to ayvTroaTaros \6yos,
only 7iames of the Son, &c." 6u6fj.aTa by the Arians, and in consequence
(x6vov, supr. p. 25. where vid. note f. failed as a test of orthodox teaching;
also p. 218, note a. And
so "the title e.g. by Arius, supr. p. 97- by Euseb.
of Image is not a token of a similar in Marc. pp. 19, d. 35, b. 161, c. by
substance, but His name only," supr. Asterius, infr 37- by Palladius and Se-
p. 210. and so infr. 38. where toIs hv6- cundus in the Council of Aquileia ap.
fxacTL is synonymous
with /car' iirivoiav, Ambros. Opp. t. 2. p. 791 (ed, Bened.) .
as Sent. D. 22. f. a. V^id. also 39. b. by Maximinus ap. August, contr. Max.
" not named
Orat. iii. 11. c. 18. d. Son, i. 6.
but ever Son," iv. 24. fin. Ep. Mg. e And so S.Ambrose, Quae enim crea-
16. e. "We call Him so, and mean tura non sicut aha creatura non est?
truly what we say ; they say it, but do Homonon ut Angelus, terra non ut
not confess it." Chrysost. in Act. Horn, coelum. de Fid. i. n. 130. and a similar
33. 4. vid. also vo^ols Sxnr^p ovSixaai, passage in Nyss. contr. Eun. iii. p. 132,
Cyril, de Trin. ii. p. 418. Non haec 3.
nuda nomina, Ambros. de Fid. ^
17. i.
i^alptToy. vid. infr. Orat. iii. 3.
Yet, since the Sabellians equally failed iv. 28. init. Euseb. Eccl. Theol.
init.
here, also considering the Sonship as pp. 47- b. 73. b. 89. b. 124. a. 129. c.
only a notion or title, vid. Orat. iv. 2. Theodor. Hist. p. 732. Nyss. contr.
e. d. (where in contrast, "The Father Eunom. iii.
p. 133. a. Epiph. Hser. TO.
is Father, and the Son Son," vid. supr. p. 970. Cyril. Thes. p. ICO.
The Word unlike all creatures. 309
instance, differs from star in glory \ and the rest have all of ^upr.
it follows not for all this that some are lords, and others
servants to the superior, nor that some are efficient causes', ^^^^'
others by them come into being, but all have a nature which
comes to be and is created, confessing in their own selves
their Framer :
—
as David says in the Psalms, The heavens Ps. 19, i.
handy work ; and as Zorobabel the wise says. All the earth
calleth ujjon the Truth, and the heaven blessed it : all icorks i Esdr.
'
shake and tremble at it.
4. But if the whole earth hymns the Framer and the Truth,
and blesses, and fears it, and its Framer is the "Word, and He
Himself sajs, I am the Truth, it follows that the Word is John l J,
hitherto, and I work. And the word hitJierto shews His Sept.
eternal existence in the Father as the Word for it is proper j"^"
^'
;
Disc, creation of the Father, and yet the Son be the Father's work
II. . .
de Civ. Dei xii. 24. de Trin. iii. 13—18. 24, 6. iii. 4, e. The Gnostics who at-
Dama'c. F. O. ii. 3. Cyril in Julian, tributed creation to Angels are alluded
()2.
" Our reason rejects the idea to infr. Orat. iii. 12. Epiph. Hser. ^2.
ii. p
that the Creator should be a creature, 53. 163, &e. Theodor. User. i. 1 and 3.
If the Word a creature, another Word to create Him. 311
Chap.
also wrought and compounded out of materials, this indeed XV i.
and not a Maker, but yet even in that case let the "Word
work the materials, at the bidding and in the service of God'.
But if He calls into existence things which existed not by His
proper Word, then the Word is not in the number of things
the Father in Him, and He that hath seen Him hath seen
the Father, because the Son's Substance is proper' to the
Father, and He Him I How then does He
in all points like
create through Him, unless it be His Word and His Wisdom?
and how can He be Word and Wisdom, unless He be the
312 If the Word, a creature, knows God, all creatures do in par,
Disc.
proper offspring of His Substance'",
and did not come to
II.
be, as others, out of nothing ? And whereas all things are
from nothing, and are creatures, and the Son, as they say, is
one of the creatures too, and of things which once were not,
how does He alone reveal the Father, and none else but He
know the Father ? For could He, a work, possibly know the
Father, then must the Father be also known by all according
to the proportion of the measures of each : for all of them are
' ^
vid. p.
95.
works as He is. But if it be impossible for things generate
either to see or to know, and the knowledge of
for the sight
vid. Ex. Him surpasses all, (since God Himself says, No one shall
33, 20.
Matt. II, see My face and live,) yet the Son has declared, No one
27. knoweth the Father save the Son, therefore the "Word is
different from things generate, in that He alone knows and
John 6, alone sees the Father, as He says. Not that any one hath
46. not
to the seen the Father, save He that is from the Father, and no
letter.
one knoioeth the Father save the Son, though Arius think
otherwise. How then did He alone know, except that He
alone was proper to Him ? and how proper, if He were a
creature, and not a true son from Him ?
(For one must not
mind saying often the same thing for religion-sake.) Therefore
it is irreligious to think that the Son is one of all things and ;
"
blasphemous and unmeaning to call Him a creature, but
not as one of the creatures, and a work, but not as one of the
"
works, an offspring, but not as one of the offsprings; for how
not as one of these, if, as they say, He was not before His
^
to the creatures and works not
generation ? for it is proper
J vid.
1.
supr.
a. and
to be before their generation, and to subsist out of nothing,
p. 276. even though they excel other creatures in glory for this ;
"Word "and "Wisdom." For instance, vid. also supr. p. 221, note e. And so
"
"Especially is it absuid to name Image" is implied in Sonship "being
the ;
Word, yet deny Him to be Son, for, if Son of God lie must be like Him,"
the Word be not from God, reasonably supr. 17- And so " Image " is implied
" Word
might they deny Him to be Son but if ;
in iv
;" ISlarfj iinSvi, tjtis
He is from God, how see they not that iarlw 6 \6yos avruv, infr. 82, d. also
what exists from any thing is son of 34, c. On the contrary, the very root
him from whom it is.'" Orat. iv. 15. of heretical error was the denial that
Again, ael 9(bs -^v koi vl6s ecni, \6yoi these titles implied each other, vid. supr.
p. 27, note i. p. 41, note
iiv. Orat. iii. 29 init. vihs n's f; b K6yos; e.
If the Word a creature, His glory different hut in degree. 313
7. Moreover if, as the heretics hokl, the Son were creature Chap.
XVI
or work, but not as one of the creatures, because of His ex-
8 ' 2'^
celling them in glory, it were natural that Scripture should
'
^'
worshipped as excelling them in glory, each of things subser-
vient ought to worship what excels itself. But this is not the
^ *''^'
case^; for creature does not worship creature, but servant
Orat. iii.
Lord, and creature God. Thus Peter the Apostle hinders 12.
Cornelius who would worship him, saying, I myself also am a Acts 10,
n "
a very wide term, be offered, except to Him whom the
"Worship is to
and has obviously more senses than one. sacrificer knew or thought or
pretended
Thus we read in one passage of Scrip- to be God ?" August, de Civ. Dei, x. 4.
ture that "all the congregation . . . "Whereas you have called so many
" dead men gods, why are ye indignant
worshipped the Lord, and the king
[David]. S. Augustine, as S. Atha- with us, who do but honour, not deify,
iiasius overleaf, makes the characteristic the martyrs, as being God's martyrs
of divine worship to consist in sacrifice, and loving servants? . That they even
. .
ship and transferred to human honours, But we, O men, assign neither sacri-
either through excessive humility, fices nor even libations to the martyrs,
or mischievous adulation yet with-;
but we honour them as men divine and
out giving us the notion that those divinely beloved." Theodor.contr. Gent,
to which they were transferred were viii. pp. U08— 910. It is observable that
not men. And these are said to be incense was burnt before the Imperial
honoured and venerated ; or were wor- Statues,vid.Orat. iii.5,note. Nebuchad-
if much is
shipped, heaped upon them ,
nezzar offered an oblation to Daniel,
but who ever thought that sacrifice was after the interpretation of his dream.
Y
314 Whereas they refuse worship, and He acce^^ts it.
I^isc. but worship the Lord. Thus Manoe the father of Samson,
wishing to offer sacrifice to the Angel, was thereupon
^.. j'^
13, 10. hindered by him, saying, Offer not to me, hut to God.
8. On the other hand, the Lord is worshipped even by the
If. 45, Him ; and by all the Gentiles, as Esaias says. The labour of
'^*
Egypt and merchandize of Ethiopia and of the Saheans, men
of stature, shall come over unto Thee, and they shall he Thine;
and then, they shall fall down unto Thee, and shall make sup-
John 16, Himself, All things, that the Father hath, are Mine. For it is
15
proper to the Son, to have the things of the Father, and to
be such that the Father is seen in Him, and that through
Him all things were made, and that the salvation of all comes
to pass and consists in Him.
°
Siapprjyvvooffiy eavrovs, also ad iucri tovs o^Si/ras, de Fug. 26. init.
Adelph. 8. and vid. supr. p. 29, note 1. Tpi^eTwa-av, ad Adelph. 8. Hist. Ar. 68.
vid. also SiappriyvvwvTai, de Syn. 64. fin. and literally 72. a. kotttovctlv eav-
necessary. Objected, that, as Moses who led out the Israelites was a man,
so our Lord but Moses was not the Agent
;
in creation :
—
again, that unity
is found in created ministrations, but such ministrations are defective
all
—
and dependent: again, that He learned to create, yet couldGod's Wisdom
need teaching ? and why should He learn, if the Father worketh hitherto ?
If the Son was created to create us, He is for our sake, not we for His.
1. And here it were well to ask them also this question ^, for
Y 2
316 If the Word created to create, weariness in God or pride.
He
.
r. 7-
things subsisted, and no one hath resisted His tcill. Why
note"c.'
then were not all things brought into being by God alone at
Rom. J), that same command, at which the Son came into being ?
Or let them tell us, why did all things through Him come to
This they not only have said, but the}' have dared to put it
3 ]3 into writing, namely, Eusebius, Arius, and Asterius who sacri-
§. 25. ficed ^. Is not this a full proof of that irreligion, with which
Is. 40, too who has said in Scripture, The Everlasting God, the Lord,
'
reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth
them ; are ye not much better than they ? Which of you by taking
thought, can add one cubit unto his stature ? And ichy take ye
thought for raiment ? Consider the lilies of the field, hoio
<=
Vid. de Deer. §. 8. supr. p. 13. also p. 523. Basil contr. Eunom. ii. 21.
Cyril. Thesaur. pp. 150, -241. de Trin. vid. also infra 29. Orat. iv. 11, 12.
If God preserves uithout help, He creates icithaut help. 317
they groic ; they toil not, neither do they spin : and yet I say Chaf.
unto you, that even Solomon in all his glory, was not -
arraijed
like one of these.
Wherefore if God so clothe the grass of the
field which to-day is, and to-morroxo is cast into the oven,
shall He not much more clothe you,
ye of little faith ? If
then it be not unworthy of God
to exercise His providence,
even down to things so small, a hair of the head, and a
sparrow,
and the grass of the field, also it was not unworthy of to Him
make them. For what things are the subjects of His pro-
vidence, of those He is Maker through His proper Word.
Nay a worse absurdity liesbefore the men who thus speak ;
'
for they distinguish between the creatures and the framino-; ^laipov-
and consider the latter the work of the Father, the creatures
^upr^p.
the work of the Son whereas either all things must be
;
^^' ^°*
endure it, all could endure it, or, it being endurable none, li-14'.
by
it was not endurable by the Word, for you say that He is one L^/rd-
of generate things. And again, if because generate nature '^''5, most
^ Vid. a similar
p. 13. vid. also by the succeeding Fathers, th:it. it is
argument in
Epiphaniiis, Haer. 76- P* impossible and needless to enumerate
f).'il. but the arguments of Ath. in the instances of agreement,
tiicse Orations are so
generally adopted
318 Moses one of many servants y the Son not one of many.
obliges them to hold that what has already come into being,
admits not of coming ! Or perhaps they opine that they have
not even come to be, as still
seeking their mediator for, on ;
'
and so the ground of their so irreligious and futile notion ^ what is
8. c. would not have subsistence, for want of the medium.
§•27. 5. But again they allege this: —
"Behold, through Moses too
did lie lead the people from Egypt, and through him He gave
the Law, yet he was a man ; so that it is possible for like to
be brought into being by like." They should veil their face
when they say this, to save their much shame. For Moses
was not sent to frame the world, nor to call into being things
which were not, or to fashion men like himself, but only to
be the minister of words to the people, and to King Pharaoh.
And this is a very different thing, for to minister is of things
number, whomever the Lord will send. For there are many
Archangels, many Thrones, and Authorities, and Dominions,
thousands of thousands, and myriads of myriads, standing
2
p. 2C8. before Him
ministering and ready to be sent.
', And
Ambros. "^^^ij Prophets, and twelve Apostles, and Paul. And Moses
de Fid. himself was not alone, but Aaron with him, and next other
seventy were fiUed with the Holy Ghost. And Moses was
succeeded by Jesus the Son of Nave, and he by the Judges,
and they by, not one, but by a number of Kings. If then the
Son were a creature and one of things generate, there must
have been many such sons, that God might have many such
ministers, just as there is a multitude of those others. But
if this is not to be seen, but the creatures are many, but the
Word one, any one will collect from this, that the Son differs
from all, and is not on a level with the creatures, but is
^
proper to the Father. Hence there are not many Words,
3
iSidrrjs
but one only Word of the one Father, and one Image of the
*p. 331, one God*.
note p.
Each thing is one in substance, the Son one also in perfection. 319
is not adequate nor sufficient alone. For God said. Let there Gen. 1',
made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of
the heaven, to give light upon the earth, and to rule over the
day and over the night. Behold there are many lights, and %• 28.
not the sun only, nor the moon only, but each is one in
substance, and yet the service of all is one in common and ;
through the night and the stars together with them accom-
;
plish the seasons and years, and become for signs, each
according to the need that calls for it. Thus too the earth
is not for all things, but for the fruits only, and to be a
ground to tread on for the living things that inhabit it.
And the firmament is to divide between waters and waters,
and to be a place to set the stars in. So also fire and water,
with other things, have been brought into being to be the con-
stituent parts of bodies and in short no one thing is alone,
;
sidering the Word to be a part of this universe, and a part in- p. 286.
^^^^ '
sufficient without the rest for the service committed to Him.
But be manifestly irreligious, let them acknowledge
if this
the sole and proper Word of the Father and their Framer.
" "
7. But," say they, though He is a creature and of things \^Y^l:^^
master and artificer has He learned
'
generate yet as ;
from a p. 47, c.
®
to frame, to God who taught Him." For
and thus ministered ^^^^^ ^id.
thus the Sophist Asterius, having learned to deny the Lord, P-
f'jP'"-
note i.
320 If He creates, not by Nature, hut after teaching, hoic Wisdom ?
Disc, has dared to write, not observing the absurdity^ which follows.
'
For if framino; be a thing to be taught, let them beware lest
aKoylav,
p. 325, they say that God Himself be a Framer not by nature but by
"°'^ ^*
science, so as to admit of His losing the power. Besides, if
the Wisdom God attained to frame by teaching, how is He
of
still Wisdom, when He needs to learn ? and what was He
before He was not Wisdom, if it needed
learned? For it
••11
as it
i^-
•^
^-
keep^ what it has learned.
,
For what has accrued not by any
irpoKowr]
p. 16, nature, but from learning, admits of being one time unlearned.
note i.
-g^^ ^^ speak thus of the AYord of God, is not the part of
*
ffvvep- but needed a fellow- worker, or under- worker and that, ;
vid.p. 12. admits of being made by God alone, since they consider
the Son to be of such a nature and so made. But God is
deficient in nothing :
perish the thought for He has said
I
Is. 1, 11.
Himself, / am full. Nor did the Word become Framer of
6 ^^^^^ all from teaching ;
but being the Image and Wisdom of the
vid.p. Father, He does the things of the Father, Nor hath He
203
note d. made the Son for the making of things generate ;
for behold,
^
Serap. thouo-h
o the Son exists,' still the Father is seen to work, as
Ji. 2. fin.
John 5, the Lord Himself says. Mi/ Father worketh hitherto and I icork.
If however, as you say, the Son came into being for the pur-
pose of making the things after Him, and yet the Father is
seen to work even after the Son, you must hold even in this
light the making of such a Son to be superfluous. Besides,
why, when He would create us, does He seek for a mediator
at all, as if His will did not suffice to constitute whatever
Ps. 115 seemed good to Him? Yet the Scriptures say, He hath done
^ xchatsoevcr pleased Him, and Who hath resisted His u-ill?
'
Rom. 9,
-'
19. And if His mere wilH is sufficient for the framing of all
*
instance of Moses, and the sun and the moon has been shewn Chap.
not to hold. — '-
Him ;
for we were not created for Him, but He is made for
'^'
woman to the man. For the man, says Scripture, was not j /^
'
created for the woman, hut the woman for the man. There- i Cor. ii,
fore, as the man is the image and glory of God, and the y] 7.
-^'
He might be ^ but as an instrument * for our need, so that rl,-
not we from Him, but He is constituted from our need. Are supr.
not men who even conceive such thoughts, more than ^^j^ j|
insensate ? For if for us the Word was made, He has not
precedence of us with
'
counselGod for He did not take
;
s
vpSiros
about us having Him within Him, but having us in Him- ''^g-'p
But if so, perchance the Father had not even a will for the
Son at all ;
for not as having a will for Him, did He create
Him, but with a will for us, He formed Him for our sake ;
by the Word, why does He not first take counsel about the
Word, who could endure His making, instead of taking counsel
about us ? or why does He not make more of Him who was
strong, than of us who were weak ? or why making
Him first,
does He not counsel about Him first ? or why counselling
^
^Bov\€ie.
about us first, does He not make us first. His wilP being suf- 7
^'g^^jj,
hidden, but must have high utterance. For the Word of^Pyj"'
God was not made for us, but rather we for Him, and Him Col. i, m
all things were created. Nor for that we were weak, was
He strong and made by He might
the Father alone, that
frame us by means of Him
an instrument perish the
as ;
—
they were made through Ilim, and reasonably. For since the
Word is the Son of God by nature proper to His substance,
and is from Him, and in Him ", as He said Himself, the -
vid.
creatures could not have come to be, except through Him. p. 140,
and ^^^^ "•
For as the light enlightens all things by its radiance,
without its radiance nothing would be illuminated, so also the
Father, as by a hand % in the Word wrought all things, and
^
.
— Moses relates, lights and Let the xcaters he
Let there he
.
3, !), 26. gathered together, and let the dry land appear, and Let us make
Ps. 33, 9. man ; as also Holy David in the Psalm, He spake and it
teas done; He commanded and it stood fast. And He spoke^,
^
'
vTTovp- not that, as in the case of men, some under- worker might
^ ^'
hear, and learning the will of Him who spoke might go away
and do it for this is what is proper to creatures, but it is
;
Hence it is that divine Scripture says not that one heard and
answered, as to the manner or nature of the things which He
"wished made ; but God only said. Let it become, and he adds,
And it became; for what He thought good and counselled,
that forthwith the Word began to do and to finish.
2. For when God commands others, whether the Angels, or
j,'^ ^ other. Send some one else; and again, // they ask me, what is
13. Jli%Name, what shall L say to them ? and the Angel said to
Ex 3 13 .
Zech.'i. ZachariaSj Thus saith the Lord ; and he asked the Lord, Lord
^7-
of hosts, hoxo long wilt Thou not have mercy on Jerusalem ?
and waits to hear good words and comfortable. For each of
^
2 vid.
p. these has the Mediator Word, and the Wisdom of God which
nofe m ^i^kes known the will of the Father. But when that Word
p. 303, Himself works and creates, then there is no questioning and
note e.
answer, for the Father is in Him and the Word in the Father ;
*>
Vid. de Derr. 9. supr. p. 15. contr. Himself, for He is the Father's Word,
Gent. 40. Iren. Haer. iii. 8. n. 3. Origen &c." August, de Trin. i. 26. On this
cotitr. Cels. ii. 9. Tertull. adv. Prax. mystery vid. Petav. Trin. vi. 4.
^ovK-t). And so ^ovKrims presently
12. fin. Patres Antioeh. ap. Rouih t. 2. ^
;
p. 468. Prosper in Psalm. 148. (149.) and (^aa ^ov\r], supr. 2. and Orat. iii.
Basil, de Sp. S. n. 20. Hilar. Trin. 63. fin. and so Cyril. Thes. p. 54. who
iv. IC. Vid. supr. p. 118, note n. p. 311. uses it used
e.xpressly, (as it is always
note i. "Tliat the Father speaks and by implication,) Kara
in contrast to the
the Son hears, or contrariwise, that the fiov\rj(Tiv of the Arians, though Athan.
Son speaks and the Father hears, are uses koto rb ;8oi^A7];Uo, e. g. Orat. iii. 31.
expressions for the sameness of nature where vid. note ;
avTos tov narphs
and the agreement of Father and Son." 6f\ri/iLa. Nyss. contr. Eunom. xii. p.
Didym. de Sp. S. 36. "The Father's 345. The principle to be observed in
bidding is not other than His Word so ;
the use of such words is this ; that we
that I have not spoken of Myself He
' '
must ever speak of the Father's will,
perhaps meant to be equivalent to 1 was command, &c
'
and the Son's fulfil-
not born from Myself.' For if the Word ment, assent, &c. as one act. Vid.
of the Father speaks. He notes on Orat. iii. 11 and 15. infr.
pronounces
as is shewn by the titles given Sim in Scripture. 325
denotes the work which is done through the Word and the
Wisdom, in which Wisdom also is the Will of the Father.
And God said is explained in the Word, for, he says, TItou Ps. 104,
hast made all things in Wisdom ; and By the Word of the p^' 33 g_
Lord were the heavens made ; and There is one Lord Jesus 1 Cor. 8,
fi»ht is ao^ainst the Godhead Itself. For if the voice were ours
which says, This is My Son, small were our complaint ofvid. Mat.
them but if it is the Father's voice, and the disciples heard
;
'
it, and the Son too says of Himself, Before all the mountains Prov. 8,
^' ^^ '
sharp sword for irreligion ? For they neither feared the voice
of the Father, nor reverenced the Saviour's words, nor trusted sacred
in the Psalm, With Thee is the well of life, and in Thy Light 24.
. . Ps. .36, f).
shall we see light, and Thou hast made all things in Wisdom; pg. 104,'*
and the Prophets say, And the Word of the Lord came to ~^-
me; and John, In the beginning teas the Word; and Luke, Joim 1,
same idea is implied in the word plied to the Arians, is, before the rise
eeofiaxoi so frequently applied to Ari- of Arianism, applied to unbelievers.
326 Scrtj^ture illustrations, in spite of their imperfection,
§. 33. is not whole. These are the evil sophistries of the heterodox ;
note n. p. 219, note b. p. 330, note m. Confess, xiii. 11. again, Ne hunc
And
Also supr. p. 20. Elsewhere after ad- imaginem ita comparet Trinitati, ut
ducing the illustration of the sun and omni modo existimet similem. Trin.
he " From fami- xv. 39. And S.Basil says, "Let no
its light, adds, things
liar and ordinary we may use some one urge against what I say, that the
poor illustration and represent intel- illustrations do not in all respects
lectually what is in our mind, since it answer to the matters in question,
were presumptuous to intrude upon the For it is not possible to apply with
incomprehensible Nature." In illud exactness what is little and low to
Omnia 3. fin. Vid. also G. And S. things divine and eternal, except so far
Austin, after an illustration from the as to refute, &e." contr. Eunom. ii. I7.
nature of the human mind, proceeds, S The Second Person in the Holy
" Far other are these three and that not a quality, or attribute, or
is
Trinity
Trinity. When a man hath discovered relation,but the One Eternal Sub-
Bometitiing in them and stated it, let stance; not a part of the First Person,
him not at once suppose that he has but whole or entire God; nor docs the
enforce in their plain sense the Catholic doctrine. 327
possible for them, are they not greatly beside themselves, tr^p**. 266
presumptuously intruding into what is higher than things
"""^^ '^•
from which they nor subsist with passion, nor impair the
are,
substances of their originals, are they not mad again in seek-
stance, which is. antecedently to it, contradiction in the terms used, but in
^ -mn '
whole and entire God. Thus there are our ideas, yet not therefore a contradic- \^", "i
'
two Persons, in Each Other ineffably, tion in fact unless indeed any one will
; ,
Each being wholly one and the same say that human words can express in
Divine Substance, yet not being merely one formula, or human thought embrace
separate as])ects of the Same, Each in one idea, the unknown and infinite
being Gi)d as absolutely as if tiuTe were God. IJasil. contr. Eun. i. 10. Vid. infr.
no other Divine Person but Himself, p. ',i'.V.\, note u.
328 Son must he taken in its traditionary sense.
j^Qjg J
mean it ? who on the rise of this odious heresy of the Arians,
P''-^!' was not at once startled at what he heard, as strange^, and
a second sowing besides that Word which had been sown from
the beginning ? For what is sown in every soul from the
beginning is that God has a Son, the Word, the Wisdom, the
Power, that is, His Image and Radiance from which it at ;
He is like ;
that He
the eternal offspring of His substance;
is
the father is thirty years old, when the son begins to be, being
begotten ;
and in short of every son of man, it is true that he
'
p. 2/6. was not before his generation^." And again they whisper,
" How can the Son be
Word, or the Word be God's Image ?
3
Orat. for the word of men is composed of syllables ^, and only
*
^^-nYirav siguifics the Speaker's will, and then is over and is lost."
TCI, Orat. 7. They then afresh, as if forgetting the proofs which have
p
Qg been already urged against t\iQxn., pierce themselves through with
vid. these bonds of irreligion, and thus argue. But the word of truth'
1 Tim.
"> *"• h He here makes the test of the tinction to obedience. Serm 60. 5 init.
Tripiepyd(oyTai, Edd. Col. Ben. and
'^
truth of explicit doctrinal statements to
lie in their not shocking, or their an- Patav. This seems an error of the
swering to the religious sense of the press for trfpiipxavrai. The Latin
Christian. translates " circumire caeperunt." Vid.
supr. p. 5, note k. Tertullian supr. p. 22, note g. p. 178, note
i Vid. c. also
uses the image in a similar but higlier iripUpxavTai, infr. 63 init. ivtirofx.-
sense when he applies it to Eve's irei^crare Koi TeOpvX-rjKare, 82. afia
temptation, and goes on to contrast it Kal Kara) TrepiioVres, Orat. iii. 54 init.
with Christ's birth from a Virgin. In avo} koI kcltoj ireptX6i/Tes dpvKoixri,
virginem adhuc Evam irrepserat verbum Apol. contr. Ar. 11 init. irepiTpfxovai,
ffidificatorium mortis in Virginem ;
de Fug. 2. vfpKpepovcri, infr. 43, irepi-
aeque introducendum erat Dei Verbum TpoxdCeiv, Theod. Hist. 1. 3. p. T30.
exstructorium vitse Ut in doloribus
. . .
-rrepifpyia, &c. is used Orat. iii. 1, a.
pareret, verbum diaboli semen illi fuit; 43 init.
contra Maria, &c. de Carn. Christ. 1?. o ttjs aXrideias xSyos iXeyxet. This
'
S. Leo, as Athan. makes "seed" in the and the like are usual forms of speech
parable aiiply peculiarly io faith in dis- with Athan. and others. Thus ds 6 rrjs
Distinction beficeen GoiVs Word and man's ivord. 329
ever ;
'
therefore also His Word is existing*
» and is everlastingly «=
^.'t'" f*^"^''
vid.de
, . y
with the Father, as radiance from light. And man's word is Deer,
Scripture. And man's words avail not for operation hence p. :«i, ;
man works not by means of words but of hands, for they have jo^n^i'
being;,
°' and man's word subsists not. But the Word of God, l- ' '
Heb. 4,
1-2, 13.
oA. air^rei A. Ap. contr. Ar. 36. where 13 fin. ttjj olA. 5€i|ao-T;s, infr. (Jo. init.
it is contrasted to diy fjdi\uv, (vid. Hist. (JO. d. iKt'-yxovrai irapa rrjs a.\7)deia.5,
Treat, tr. p. 2(J6, note d.) also Serap. 63. c. ^ aATJSeia Sei/ffum, 70. init. t/)s
ii.
Epiphanius; 6 T^s o-A. A. aj'TiTTiTTTft
2. dA. fj.auTvpri(Ta.ar]s, 1. init. to T-ijj oA.
Eusebius; 6 TTJ? dA. A. /3oa.
auT&j, p. 830. (pp6xrr}fxa ^xiyaKtryopi'iv TrpeTre?, 31.
init.
Eccl. Theol. i. p. 62. d. avrKpOey^frai. de Deer. 17 fin. In some of these
avT(S /xfya fioi]aa%, b rrjS dA. A. ibid, instances the words aArideia, xSyas, tkc.
iii.p. 164. b. And Council of Sardica ; are almost synonymous with the Regula
Kara rhv rrjs dA. A. ap. Athan. Apot. Fidei ; vid. irapa rriv aX-qdetav, infr. 3G.
contr. Ar. 46. where it seems equiva- a. and Ori^en. de Princ. Prsef. 1 and 2.
lent to "fairness" or "impartiality." "' For this contrast between the Di-
Asterius ;
ol ttjs dA. oLTrofaivovrai vine Word and the human which is Its
Aoyia-jxoi. infr. 37- Orat. i. 32. de Syn. shadow, vid. also Orat. iv. 1. circ. fin.
18. cir. fin. and so Athan. to7s dA. Iren. User. ii. 13, n. 8. Origen. in Joan.
\oyi(TfjLo7i. Sent. D. 19, c. And so i.
p. "JS.e. Euseb. Deuionstr. v. 5. p. 230.
also, 7j dA. 5ir;Ae7|e, supr. 18. c. rj Cyril, Cat. .xi. 10. Basil, Horn. xvi. 3.
(pvaris Ka\ ',) oA. " draw the meaning to Nyssen contr. Kunom. xii. p. S.'iO. Orat.
themselves," supr. 5. init. tov \6yov (!at. i.
p. 478. Damasc. F. O. i. 6.
SuKi'vi'Tos, 3. init. tSf Iki'vo/ u \uyos, August, in F.-alni 44, 5.
Z
330 As profane as to ask Jioic the Son is as how God is.
Disc, as the Apostle saj^s, is living and powerful and sharper than
—— — any
^
John 1, whom tee have to do. He is then Framer of all, and without
3
Eini was made not one thing, nor can any thing be made
without Him.
§. 36. Nor must we ask why the "Word of God is not such as our
8.
one as if they sought where God is, and how God is, and of
° Eusebius has some forcible remarks S. Greg. Naz. Orat. 29. 8. Vid. also
on this subject in his Eccl. Theol., Hippol. in Noet. 10*. Cyril.Cat.xi.il.
though he converts them to an heretical and 19. and Origen, according to IMo-
purpose. As, he says, we do
not know sheim. Ante Const, p. 619. And in-
how God can create out of nothing, so stances in Petav. -de Trin. v. (j. §. 2.
us no true idea of that which is above heretics." August. Ep. 43. init. vid.
all images. Eccl. Theol. i. 12. So has also de Bapt. contr. Don. iv. 23.
Many words of men, One Word of God. 331
because, though he has questioned, he has yet kept quiet; but ^"/^[j
when a man is led by his perplexity into forming for himself
doctrines which beseem not, and utters what is unworthy of
God, such daring incurs a sentence without mercy. For in
such perplexities divine Scripture is able to afford him some
relief, so as to take rightly what is written, and
to dwell upon
from us,
^py^
ideas which are successive and what strikes them first and
;
second, that they utter so that they have many words, and
;
and say that the Father's proper and natural Word is other
than the Son, bv whom He even made the Son"', and that
P Vid. supr. 35. Orat. iv. 1. also pre- g. infr. 39 init. and ouS' e/c iroWSov efs,
sently, "He is likeness and image of Sent. D. 25. a. also Ep. Mg. 14. c.
the sole and true God, being Himself Origen in Joan. torn. ii. 3. Euseb.
sole also," 49. ix6vos dv ti6vc^\ Orat. iii. Demonstr. v. 5. p. 229 fin. contr. Marc.
21. SAos '6\ov tlKtLv. Sarap. i. 16, a. p. 4 fin. contr. Sabell. init. August, in
"The Offspring of the Ingeneratc," Joan. Tract i. 8. also vid. Pbilo's use
" is One from of Ao'yoi for Angels as commented on
says St. Hilary, One,
True from True, Living from Living, by Burton, Bampt. Lcct. p. 556. The
Perfect from Perfect, Power of Power, heathens called Mercury by the name
Wisdom of Wisdom, Glory of Glory." of \6yos. Vid. Benedictine note f. in
AeTrm.W.^.TiKeios T^Xiiov yiyivvr]Kiv, Justin. Ap. i. 21.
point in which Arians
^ This was the
nvivixa irvevfia. Epiph. Hser. p. 495.
"As Light from Light, and Life from and Sabellians agreed, vid. infr. Orat.
Life, and Good from Good ; so from also p. 3H6, note b.
iv. init. and supr.
Eternal Eternal. Nyss. contr. Eunom. p. 41, note e. p. 31 1, note k. aho Sent.
i.
p 164. App. D. 25. Ep. /Eg. 14 fin. Epiph. Hser.
1 iro\\o\ \6yoi, vid. supr. p. 26, note 72. p. 835, b.
Z 2
332 Arius and Asterins thought God's wisdom an attribute.
Disc.
— andwho Son is but iiotionall}^ called Word % as vine, '
Jfe is
really
f-^, way, and door, and tree of life and that He is called ;
iirivoiav AVisdom also only in name, the proper and true Wisdom of
= the Father, which co-exist ingeneratelj^" with Him,
ayivv-r}-
being other
^^^^ ^^® ^o^j ^y which He even made the Son, and named
'
E^seb.'
Ecci. Him Wisdom as partakino^ of it.
"
l(i(i. d. 10. This they have not confined to words, but xirius has said
in his Thalia, and the Sophist Asterius has written, what we
have stated above, as follows " Blessed Paul
: said not that he
mgenerate, surely
many wisdoms which are one by one created by Him, of
whom Christ is the first-born and only-begotten all how- ;
of the Psalms invites, not the Angels alone, but the Powers
to praise God."
§. 38. 11. Nowarethey not worthy of all hatred for merely uttering
this? for if, as they hold, He is Son, not because He is begotten
s that is, they allowed Him to be but " notionally Word." Vid. p. 307,
" He wa3
really Son," and argued that d.
Son and Word not names tahen from the creatures. 333
of the Father and proper to His Substance, but that He is called il"'\
j-
who are made sons and perhaps because there are things
:
existing, He has the gift of existence ', that is, in our notions
only ". And then after all what is He? for He is none of these
and He has but a
'
Himself, if thev are but His names ": P ^^T,
^ ^
us. Rather this is some recklessness of the devil *, or worse, a.n6voia
p. 9,
not this portentous, to say that Wisdom co-exists with the note s.
Father, yet not to say that this is the Christ, but that there
are many created powers and wisdoms, of which one is the
Lord whom they go on to compare to the caterpillar and
locust ? and are they not profligate, who, when they hear us
t Of course this line of thought con- which our infirmity views, in which
it can view, what is infinite and
sistently followed, leads to a kind of also
Pantheism ; for what is the Supreme incomprehensible. That is. He is kolt^
Being, according to it, but an ideal firivoiav holy or merciful, being in reality
standard of perfection, the sum total of a Unity which is all mercifulness and also
all that we see excellent in the world in all holiness, not in the way of qualities
the highest degree, a creation of our but as one indivisible perfection ; which
minds, without real objective existence? istoo great for us to conceive as It is.
The true view of our Lord's titles, on the And for the very reason that we cannot
otiierhand, is that He is That properly conceive It simply, we are bound to use
and in perfection, of which in measure thankfully these conceptions, which are
and degree the creatures partake from our best possible since some concep-
;
and in £Iim. Vid. supr. p. 2!>, note k. tions, however imperfect, are better than
^ icar' iirlvoiav, in idea or notion. none. They stand for realities which
This is a phrase of very frequent occur- they do not reach, and must be ac-
rence, both in Athan. and other writers. cepted for what they do not adequately
We have found it already just above, represent. But when the mind comes
and ji. 96, note e. p. 1!).*}, r. 1. also Orat. to recognise this existing inadequacy,
iv. 2, 3. de Sent. D. 2. Ep. Mg. 12, 13, and to distrust itself, it is tempted to
14. It denotes our idea or conception of rush into the opposite extreme, and to
a thing in contrast to the thing itself. conclude that because it cannot under-
Thus, the sun is to a savage a bright stand fully, it does not realize any
circle in the sky a man is a " rational
; thing, or that its iirluoiai are but 6u6fJ.ara.
animal," according to a certain process Hence some writers have at least
of abstraction a herb may be medicine
;
seemed to say that the Divine Being
upon one division, food in another; was but called just, good, and true,
virtue may be called a mean and faith is ; (vid. Davison's protest in
Not€ at end
to one man an argumentative conclusion, of Discourses on Prophecy,) and in like
to another a moral peculiarity, good or maimer the Arians said that our Lord
bad. In like manner, the Almighty is in was but called the Son and the Word,
reality most simple and uncompouiided, not properly, but from some kind of
without parts, passions, attributes, or analogy, as being the archetype and
properties yet we speak of llim as
; representative of all those who are
good or holy, or as angry or pleased, adopted into God's family and gifted
denoting some particular aspect in with wisdom.
334 If attribute Wisdom realhj in God,lTeis of a compound nature.
?
...
besides this Son, that they should frame to
terius speaks of Wisdom as a really They are eternally distinct and sub-
existing thing in the Divine Mind. Vid. stantive Persons but it is a depth and
;
Nothing is more remarkable than the full a sense be One, or how the Divine
confident tone in which Athan. accuses Nature does not come under number.
Arians as here, and Sabellians in Orat. vid. notes on Orat. iii. 27 and 'AG.
iv. 2. of considering the Divine Nature Thus, "being uncompounded in na-
as compound, as if the Catholics were in ture," says Athan. "lie is Father of
no respect open to such a charge. Nor One Only Son." supr. p. 19. In truth
are they; though in avoiding it, they the distinction into Persons, as Pe-
are led to enunciate the most profound tavius remarks, "avails especially to-
and ineffable mystery. Vid. supr. p. 32G, wards the unity and simplicity of God."
note g. The Father is the One Simple Vid. de Deo. ii. 4, 8.
Entire Divine Being, and so is the Son ;
Scripture knows but one Word and Son. 335
good tidings spoken of Him by John, The Word was made John i,
flesh, and all things icere made by Him. ^^^ 3
13. "Wherefore of Him alone, our Lord Jesus Christ, and
of His oneness with the Father, are written and set forth
the testimonies, both of the Father signif^dng that the
Son One, and of the sacred writers, aware of this and
is
wrest the true sense ^ of the name of the Word and the ^!f P*r. „o.
•
ooo,
z Vid.
(in addition to what is said Roman Missal. The verse is made to
supr. p. 208, note a.) Simon. Hist. Crit. end after "in Him," (thus, ovS' ev o
Comment. I'p. 7) 32, 52. Lampeinloc. yiyovtv iv aiiroi) by Epiph. Ancor. 75.
Joann. Fabric, in Apocryph. N. T. t. 1. Hil. in Psalm 148, 4. Ambros. de Fid.
p. 384. Petav. de Trin. ii. G. §. 6. Ed. iii. 6. Nyssen in Eunom. i.
p. 84. app.
Ben. in Ambros. de Fid. iii. 6. Wet- which favours the Arians. The coun-
stein in loo. Wolf. Cur. Phil, in loc. terpart of the ancient reading, which
The verse was not ended as we at is very awkward, (" What was made
present read it, especially in the East, in Him was life,") is found in August,
till the time of S. Chrysostom, accord- loc. cit. and Ambrose in Psalm 36, 35.
ing to Simon, vid. in Joann. Horn. v. but he also notices "What was made,
init. though as we have seen supra, S. was in Him," de Fid. loc. cit. It is
Epiphanius had spoken strongly against remarkable that St. Ambrose attributes
the ancient reading. S. Ambrose loc. the present punctuation to the Alex-
cit. refers it to the Arians, Lampe refers andrians in loc. Psalm, in spite of
it to the Valentinians on the strength Athan.'sand Alexander's, (Theod. Hist,
of Iren. Hser. i. 8, n. 5. Theophilus in i. 3. p. 733.) nay Cyril.'s (in loc. Joann.)
loc. (if the Comment on the Gospels is adoption of the ancient,
"an idol," ^
his) understands hy ovSev /caTaxp'>i»'Toi. vid. supr. p. 10, note
referring to 1 Cor. viii. 4. Augustine, s. and so KaTaxpvo"^"<ws, Cyril. Cat. xi.
evenat so late a date, adopts the old 4. Epiph. Haer. fj!), p. 743. 71, P- 831.
reading, vid. de Gen. ad lit. v. 2!)— 31. Euseb. contr. Marc. p. 40. Concil.
Tt was the reading of the Vulgate, even Labb. t. 2. p. G?- and abusive, ibid,
at the time it was ruled by the Council p. 210.
of Trent to be authentic, and of the
336 Inconaistency of Asterius.
Disc.
Wisdom, and framing to themselves others, they deny the
true Word of God, and the real and only Wisdom of the
Father, and thereby, miserable men, rival the Manichees.
For they too, when they behold the works of God, deny
Him the only and true God, and frame to themselves
another, whom they can show neither by work nor in any
§. 40. testimony drawn from the divine oracles. Therefore, if
neither in the divine oracles is found another wisdom besides
"'
this Son, nor from the fathers have we heard of any such,
'
^^'
yet they have confessed and written of the Wisdom co-exist-
ing with the Father ingenerately, proper to Him, and the
Framer of the world, this must be the Son who even according
to them is eternally co-existent with the Father. For He is
Ps. 104, Framer of all, as it is written, In Wisdom hast Thou made
24.
them all.
they will not say that they two are words, nor maintain that
there are many wisdoms. For it is not possible, whereas the
Word is one, and Wisdom has been set forth as one, to dispense
to the multitude of children the Substance of the Word, and
to bestow on them the appellation of Wisdom." It is not
then at all wonderful, that the Arians should battle with the
truth, when they have collisions with their own principles
and conflict with each other, at one time saying that there are
many wisdoms, at another maintaining one at one time ;
Wisdom and His Power are ingenerate also. And they battle
with us for saying that the Word of God is ever, yet forget
theirown doctrines, and say themselves that Wisdom co-exists
^
^
(TKoro- with God ingenerately **. So dizzied are they in aU these
Orat. b Asterius Son was created by and
iii.
held, 1. that there was an railed after
42. iriit.
Attribute called Wisdom; 2. that the that Attribute ;
or 1. that Wisdom was
If the Son not one uitli the Father, the Fathernot all- sufficient. 337
matters, denying the true Wisdom, and inventing one which J^" ^J"'
is not, as the Manicbees who made to themselves another
God, after denying Him that is.
15. But let the other and the Manichees also know §
heresies 'il-
that the Father of the Christ One, and is Lord and Maker
is
of the creation through His proper Word. And let the Ario-
maniacs know in particular, that the One, Word of God is
being the only Son proper and genuine from His Substance,
and having with His Father the oneness of Godhead indi-
visible, as we have said many times, being taught it
by the
Saviour Himself. Since, were it not so, wherefore through
Him does the Father create, and in Him reveal Himself to
is holy to say, what is the need of the Son for framing the
ingenerate and eternal, 2. that there Sabellian tenet, which is the first,
were created wisdoms, words, powers which in reality they also held,
against the latter that he held an eternal that Divine Person who iii the Economy
and ingenerate A.070?, (vid. contr. Marc, of grace is creator, enliglitener, Ike.
pp. 5 init. ;i5, c. l()(i, d. 119, c. vid. God is represented all-perfect, but
infr. note on Orat. iv. 3.) which is acting according to a certain divine
identical with the former of the two order. This is explained just below,
propositions. That is, the zealous Here the remark is in point about the
maintenance of their peculiar tenet right and wrong sense of the words
" "
about the Son. which is the second, commanding," obeying," &c. supra,
involved them in an opposition to the p. 324, note c.
338 The Father icorks by the Son, not from need, but by nature.
note e. 16. We
Said a few words i ust now on the fitness that all things
gupr
should be made by Him but since the course^ of the discussion
;
where the light, there the radiance and as what the Father
;
worketh, He
*
*id- worketh through the Son \ and the Lord Himself
" What I see the Father
Orat. iii.
says, do, that do I also ;" so also
1— l'''^-
when baptism is given, whom the Father baptizes, him the
11 and Son baptizes ;
and whom the Son baptizes, he is consecrated
5
Orat.
i^ ^^ Holy Ghost ^ And again as when the sun shines, one
15.
might say that the radiance illuminates, for the light is one
111.
note
and indivisible, nor can be detached, so where the Father is
or is named, there plainly is the Son also and is the Father ;
31. Passages like these are distinct Catholic doctrine here sjiokcn of was
from such as the one quoted from Athan. later, vid. de Trin. iv Iti.
He thus spoke ;
I and the Father tcill come, and mahe Our Chap.
abode in him ; and again, that, as I and Thou are One, so t^^cy
;r^^
may he one with Us. the grace given is one, given from John 14,
And
the Father in the Son, as Paul writes in every Epistle, Grace ^^hnY;,
u)ito you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus 21.
1 1 1 . T
-,
Rom- '>
Christ. For the must be with the ray, and the radiance 7.
light
must be contemplated together with its own light.
17. Whence the Jews, as denying the Son as well as they, have
not the Father either; for, as having left the Fountain o/'Bar. 3,
12.
Wisdom, as Baruch reproaches them \ they put from them the pp. 20. i
Wisdom springing from it, our Lord Jesus Christ, (for Christ, 2*'7^^ ^
says the Apostle, is God's power and God's wisdom,)
when 24.
have -["^^^ '^'
they said. We hare no king hut Ccesar. The Jews then
the penal award of their denial; for their city as well aa
their reasoning came to nought. And these too hazard the
fulness of the mystery, I mean Baptism for if the conse- ;
-
cration is ffiven to us into the Name of Father and Son, and reKfiu.
'
. ffts, ini-
from Him and like His Substance, and deny also the true
Son, and name another of their own framing as created
them, is other than the truth, though they pretend to name t^^"""' so-
the Name of the Father and the Son, because of the words p. 193.
of Scripture. For not he who simply says, " Lord," gives ^|^°^
...
]3aptism ;
but he who with Name
has also the right
the 57. twice
"Baptize into the name of Father, and Son, and Holy Ghost;"
that the right faith might follow upon learning, and together
"
with faith come the consecration of Baptism.
might
e The
primd facie sense of this p. 227- Voss. de Bapt. Disp. 19 and
to 20. Forbes Instruct. Theol. x. 2. 3, and
passage is certainly unfavourable
the validity of heretical baptism vid. ;
12. Hooker's Eccl. Pol. v. (\2. §. T)— 1 1.
the subject considered at length in On Arian J5aptism in particular, vid.
Note G. on Tertullian, O. T. vol. 1. Jablonski's Diss. Opusc. t. iv. p. 113.
p. 280. also Coust. Pont. Rom. Ep.
340 Heritical haptkm may he said to pollute.
Disc. There are many other heresies too, which use the words
18.
II.
but without orthodoxy, as I have said, nor the sound
17437 only,
'
T-^V
faith ^ and in consequence the water which they administer
TT.
of pro- f S.
Cj'prian speaks of those who liness." Vid. Suicer Tlies. in voc. It
visions. prophana aqua polluuntur, Ep. "jd fin. was a popular imputation upon Chris-
(ed. Ben.) and of the hsereticorum tians, as it had been before on philo-
sordida tinctio,Ep. 71 cir. init. S. sophers and poets, some of whom better
" various and deserved it. On the word as a term of
Optatus speaks of the
false baptisms, in which the stained reproach vid. Voet. Disput." 9. t. 1.
cannot wash a man, the filthy cannot pp. 115, &c. L95. It is used of heathens,
cleanse." ad Parinen. i. 12. Iambus contr. Gent. 46 init. Orat. iii. (J7 fin.
in the Council of Carthage speaks of and by Eusebius, Eccl. Theol. p. 73, c.
persons baptized without the Church as who also applies it to Sabellius, ibid. pp.
" non dicam
lotos, sed sordidatos." ap. 63, 107, b. to Marcellus, p. 80, c. to
c.
weep over them, for that they sacrifice their own interest for
h rhv '
/caAis avayiviLffKnv
ws utpts ISv. also Ep. ^g. 19. opQi]v
Hist. Ar. GO. and so Arians, are dogs exof -rriv ^Mvoiav, i. e. the text admits
(with allusion to 2 Pet. ii. 22.), de of on interpretation consistent with the
Deer. 4. Hist. Ar. 29. lions, Hist. Ar. analogy of faith, and so /xer' eucre^eios
11. wolves, Ap. c. Arian. 49. hares, de just below. Vid. supr. p. 283, note c
Fug. 10. chameleons, de Deer. init. infr. p. JJ43, note c. Such phrases are
hydras, Orat. iii. 5!! fin. eels, Ep. JEig. frequent in Athan. e. g. rriu Sidvoiav
7 fin. cuttlefish, Orat. iii. 59. gnats, de fvaf^rj Koi Xiaf opQriv, de Deer. 13.
Deer. 14 init. Orat. iii. 59 init. beetles, KahSis koI opQCos, Orat. iv. 31, e.
Orat. iii. fin. leeches. Hist. Ar. Go init. y4ypaTVTai ixdAa avajKalws, de Deer,
de Fug. 4. In many of these instances 14 tUL-c^Tois, Orat. ii. 44, e. iii. 63, a. ri]y
the allusion to Scripture.
is names On Sidvoiai/ iicKKriataaTiKrjv, Orat. i. 44
heretics in general, vid. the init. rhv crKotrhv rhv iKKX-qaiacmKhv,
given to
Alphabetum bestialitatis hereticse ex Orat. iii. 58, a. ^ Sidvoia exf '^'V alriav
Patrum Symbolis, in the Calvinismus evKoyov, iii. 7 fin. Vid. also Orat. i. 37
bestiarum religio attributed to Ray- init. 4G. ii. 1, a, c. 9 init. 12, b. 53, d.
naudus and printed in the Apopompaeus iii. 1, c. 18, a. 19, b. 35, c. 37, b. iv.
of his works. Vid. on the principle of 30, a,
such applications infr. Orat. iii. 18.
CHAPTER XIX.
§. 44. 1. We
have gone through thus much before the passage in
the Proverbs, resisting the insensate fables which their hearts
have invented, that they may know that the Son of God ought
not to be called a creature, and may learn rightly to read
1
opdriv, what admits in truth of a sound explanation. For it is*
note i.' written, TJw Lord created Me a heginning of Mis ways, for His
Prov. 8, tcorJcs ; since, however, these are proverbs and it is expressed
in the way of proverbs, we must not expound them nakedlj'-
in their first sense, but we must
inquire into the person,
and thus religiously put the sense on it. For what is said
in proverbs, is not said plainly but is put forth latently ^, as
the Lord Himself has taught us in the Gospel according to
Gen. 4, I. after the Sept. and Vulg. to refer to such parallel passages in
in the sense of generation, vid. also later Fathers.
Deut. 32, 6 The Hebrew sense is
;
Proverbs are not to he taken literally. 343
does John say. The Word was made flesh; and by Solomon Jo^^^ i.
Wisdom says of Itself with cautious exactness \ not "lip. 298,
am a creature," but only The Lord haih created Me a p°*^^^g
" created Me 22.
beginning of His ways for His works yet not '^,
"
that I might have being," nor because I have a creature's
beginning and generation."
3. For in this passage, not as signifying the Substance of His §• 45.
Disc.
Godhead, nor His own everlasting and genuine generation
'
-~^7^ from the Father, has the Word spoken b}' Solomon, but on
the other hand His manhood and economy towards us. And,
as I said before. He has not said "I am a creature," or
'*I became a creature," but only He created^. For the
creatures, ha^dng a created substance, are generate, and are
said to be created, and in short the creature is created : but
this mere term He created does not necessarily sio-nify the
substance or the generation, but indicates something else as
f He seems here to
say that it is of our hope to be " worm," and " man,"
both true that "The Lord created," and " " curse."
crucified," and In
and yet that the Son was not created. Eph ii. He is supported by Athan.
10.
Creatures alone are created, and He infr. 46.
Ep. .Eg. I7. E.xpos. F. 3.
was not a creature. Rather something ad Serap. ii. 8. fin. Naz. Orat. 30, 2.
belonging or relating to Him, some- tin. 38, 13. Nyss. in Cant. Horn. 13.
thing short of His substance or nature, t. i. p. 6(;3. init. Cyr. Horn. Pasch.
was created. However, it is a question 17, p. 233. Max. Mart. t. 2. p. 265.
in controversy whether even His Man- Damasc. F. O. iii. 3. Hil. de Trin.
hood can be called a creature, though xii. 48. Ambros. Psalm. 118. Serm.
many of the Fathers, (including Athan. 5. 25. August. Ep. 187, n. 8. Leon.
in several places.) seem so to call it. Serm. 77, 2. Greg. Mor. v. G3. The
The difficulty may be viewed thus that ; principal authority on the other side is
our Lord, even in His human nature is S. Epiphanius, who ends his argument
the natural, not the adopted. Son of with the words, " The Holy Church of
God, (to deny which is the error of the God worships not a creature, but the
Adoptionists,) whereas no creature can Son who is begotten, Father in Son,
be His natural and true Son and again;
&c." Heer. 6.9, 36. And S. Proclus
that His human nature is worshipped, too speaks of the child of the yirgin
which would be idolatry if it were a as being " Him who is worshipped, not
creature. The question is discussed in the creature," Orat. v. fin. On the
Petav. de Incarn. vii. (i. who determines whole it would appear, (1.) that if
that the human nature, though in itself " "
creature," like Son," be a personal
a created substance, yet viewed as term, He is not a creature but if it be ;
called creature, viewed as man, in ."i since the flesh is infinitely beneath
Thom. Disp. G(i. and Raynaud Opp. t. His divinity, it is neither natural nor
2. p. >!4. expressing his opinion strongly. safe to call Him a creature, (according
And Berti de Theol. Disc, .\xvii. 5. who to St. Thomas's example, " non di-
adds, however, with Suarez after S. cimus, quod ^Ethiops est albus, sed quod
Thomas (in 3 Thorn. Disput. 34. Opp. est albus secundum dentes ") and (4.)
t. IG. p. 4o!t.) that it is better to abstain that, if the flesh is worshipped, still it is
from the use of the term. Of the worshipped as in the' Person of the Son,
Fathers, S. Jerome notices the doubt, not by a separate act of worship. " A
and decides it in favour of the term ; creature worship not we," says Athan.
" " Wisdom in the "
Since," he says, perish the thought but the Lord
. . .
God, and many through fear lest they part of creation, yet it has become
should be
obliged to call Christ a God's body . . . who so senseless as
creature, deny the whole mystery of to say to the Lord, Remove out of the
Christ, and say that not Christ, but body, that I may worship Thee.'" ad
the world's wisdom is meant by this Adelph. 3. Epiph has imitated this
Wisdom, we freely declare, that there passage, Ancor. 51. introducing the
is no hazard in callitig Him creature, illustration of a king and his robe,
whom we confess with all the confidence &c.
Only the creattires can he said to he created. 345
says, A7id the third part of the creatures in the sea died Rev. 8,
9.
which had life ; as also Paul says. Every creature of God is 1 Tim.
4,
Person a creature," or " that His Person avBpu-rros, iv 25, c. It is observed p. 291
is created?" vid. Note, p, 147 17G. — note k. how this line of teaching might
,
Athan.'s use of the phrase ovixia tou be wrested to the purposes of the Apolli-
KoySv has already been noticed, supr. narian and Eutychian heresies and, ;
p. 244, note k. and passages from this onsidenng Athan.'s most emphatic
Oration are given in another connexion protests against their errors in his later
in the translation of his Hist. Tracts works, as well as bis strong statements
p. 300. note m. The term is synony- in Orat. iii. there is no hazard in this
2 A
346 The word "created" is used in Scripture for renovation.
Disc. And Paul in his Epistle to the Colossians, Who is the Lnage
II.
Col. of the Invisihle God, the First horn of every creature, for in
1,
15—17. Him icere all things created that are in heaven, and that
Eph. 4, create in Himself of two one new man; and again. Put
22.
ye on the neio man, which after God is created in righteous-
2
vid. ness and true holiness^. For neither David spoke of any
Cyr.
Thes. people created in substance,
nor prayed to have another
p. 150. heart than that he had, but meant renovation according to
God and renewal; nor did Paul signify any two created
in substance in the Lord, nor again did he counsel us to put
on other man but he called the life according to virtue
any ;
the two people who are renewed in Him. Such too is the
Jer. 31, language of the book of Jeremiah The Lord hath created ;
h vid. also
Expos. F. 3. where he woman shall compass a mau," is with
notices that this is the version of the the Hebrew, as is the Vulgate. Athan.
"
The Lord has preserved Aquila's version in three
Septuagint, Aquila's being
hath created a new thing in the woman." other places, in Psalm xxx. 12. lix. 5.
Our own "a new thing in the earth, a Ixv. 18.
Our Lord teas created only so far as He was man. 347
a He
Himself says about Himself in the Chap.
creature, only
Proverbs, The Lord hath created Me, shame upon you both on
the ground of the distinction aforesaid and for that the diction
is like that of
proverbs and accordingly let He created be
;
deed is it not evidently imfair in you, when David and Paul 34(;^ r.
stance and the generation, but the renewal yet, when the ;
her an house, she hath heum out her seven pillars, to understand
house allegorically, but to take He created as it stands, and to
fasten on it the idea of creature ? and neither His being
Framer of all has had any weight with you, nor have you
feared His being the sole and proper Offspring of the Father,
but recklessly, as if you had enlisted against Him, do ye
fight, and think less of Him than of men.
6. For the very passage proves that it is only an invention §. 47.
of your own to call the For the Lord, know-
Ijord creature.
on hearing, Christ hath become a curse for us, and He hath q^\ 3'
made Him sin for us who kneiv no sin, we do not simply l^-
conceive this, that whole Christ has become curse and sin, 5, 21.
but that He has taken on Him the curse which lay against
us, (as the Apostle has said. Has redeemed us from the curse, Gal. 3,
'
and has carried, as Esaias has said, our sins, and as Peter ^^ ^^ ^
has written, has borne them in the body on the tcood ;) so, if it i Pet.
"'
is said in the Proverbs He created, we must not conceive
i
Here he says that, though our as to the flesh, it is not
right to call
Lord's flesh is created or He is created Him a creature. Tins is very much
'^
f^ A 2
J\. />^
348 He was a cyeafiirc, as He was a " hcyixnituj of ivaijs"
Disc,
sakes, preparing for Him the created body, as it is written,
'-— for us, that in Him we might be capable of being renewed
1
eioirotv- and made gods '.
y^ AVhat then has deceived you, O senseless, to call the
rtpai
§. 48. For if He is Offspring, how call j^e Him creature ? for no one
as the ways are, and the waj^s must be such as the Word, though
*
apxv in point of time He be created first of them. For the beginning'*
what S. Thomas says, as referred to in bald." Since crispus, or bald, can but
note f. in the words of the refer to the hair. Still more does this
p. 344,
Schools, that ^thiops, albus secundum remark apply in tlie ''ase of " Sonship,"
denies, not est albus. But why may which is a personal attribute altogether;
not our Lord be so called upon the as proved, says Petav. de Incarn. vii.
is
maium, (infra note on iii. 31.) as He is in all respects a man like Seth, yet not
said to be, born of a to have a son. Accordingly, we may not call
suffered, &c. ?
Virgin,
The reason is this: — our Lord, even according to the man-
birth, &c. confessedly belong
passion, hood, an adopted Son.
to His human nature, without adding ^ o^oiv, and so in Justin's
o.px'nv
"according to the flesh;" but "creature" Tryph. (Jl. The Bened. Ed. in loc.
not implying humanity, might appear a refers to a similar application of the
simple attribute of His Person, if used word to our Lord in Tatian contr. Gent,
without limitation. Thus, as S. Thomas 5. Athenag. Ap. 10. Iren. Hser. iv. 20.
say yEthiojjS iste albus, we may say TertuU. adv. Prax. (j. and Ambros. de
" " he is Fid.
crispus est," or in like manner, iii. 7-
Yef even a^hcyinninc/ qftvai/s" must be more t/uni a crmture. 349
subject to the former, but all the city equally has its govern-
ment and constitution from its maker. If then the Lord
is in such sense created as a hcgiitHing of all things, it would
follow that He and all other things together make up the
it is plain from what has been said, that among the creatures
'
not any is of a constant nature and of prior formation, but '
eunofov,
of birds, and fishes, and cattle, and plants such too was that ;
of the human race after God's Image for though Adam only ;
was formed out of the earth, yet in him were the means of
the succession of the whole race. And from the visible §. 49.
on the right of the throne, some all around, and some on the
350 Hecoi(lclnothe'^heginning"atall,ifnotmorethan'^he(jinning."
'
'
the Lord\
pp. 267,'
He is, and is Himself alone First and Son, it does not follow
that He is beginning of all things as to His Substance ^, for
what is the beginning of all is in the number of all. And if
He is not such a beginning, then neither is He a creature,
but it is very plain that He differs in substance and nature
is our God, and another shall not he reckoned with Him. For
the One creates, and the rest are created and the One is the ;
and
proper "W^ord and Wisdom of
the Father's Substance,
^. 50. existed not, were made. Your famous assertion then, that
misin-
nay Solomon convicts you of having these many times
him. For He has not called Him creature, but
terpreted
vid. God's Offspring and Wisdom, saying, God in Wisdom hath
established the earth, and Wisdom hath built her an house.
^"'i'^-
thing later than Himself, He will seem later than the works,
finding them on His creation already in existence before Him,
1
He says that, though none could be the number of the creatures." Though
"a beginning" of creation, who was a He becomes the "beginning," He is
creature, j'et still that such a title be- not " a beginning as to His substance,"
vid. supr. p. 251, note f. And infr. p. 3G7,
longs not to His essence. It is the name " He who is
of an office which the Eternal Word where he says before all,
alone can till. His Divine Sonship is cannot be a beginning of all, but is
both superior and necessary to that other than all," which implies that the
office of a "Beginning." Hence it is beginning of all is not other than all.
both true (as he says) that " if the Word vid. p. 292, note m. on the Priesthood,
is a creature, He is not a beginning;" and p. 303, note e,
and yet that that " beginning" is "in
" For the Works " and " "
the Lord imply the flesh. 351
12. And
something besides may be understood from the
passage itself for, being Son and having God
;
for His Father,
form. For it became Him, on the one hand being the Word
from the Father, to call God Father for this is proper to :
helji the Son of Thine handmaid. For the natural and true pg' gfj^
^^'
child of God and the sons of the handmaid, that is, of
is one,
the nature of things generate, are other. Wherefore the One,
^
as Son, has the Father's might but the rest are in need of
;
c
Trarpi-
salvation. (But if, because He was called child ^ they idly "^^ _^
raise a point, let them know that both Isaac was named 3'T^a7s,i.
servant
Abraham's child, and the son of the Shunamite was called
young child.) Reasonably then, we being servants, when He
became as we, He too calls the Father Lord, as we do and ;
nature, and receiving the Spirit of the Son, might have con-
fidence to call Him by who is by nature our
grace Father,
Lord. But Lord Father, do not deny
as we, in calling the
that servitude which is by nature, (for we are His works, and
it is He that hath made us, and not we ourselves,) so when Ps. loo
352 As ice, servants, call God Father; so He, Son, calls Hun Lord.
Dtsc. the Son, on taking the servant's form, says, The Lord hath
Johin
— created Me a beginning of His ways, let them not deny
J- 3. the eternity of His Godhead, and that in the beginning teas
'
16. the Word, and all things icere made hj Him, and in Him all
"
Our Lord is said to be created for the works," i. e. with a particular pur-
which no mere creatures are ever said to be. Parallel of Isai. 49, 5.
pose,
&c. When His manhood is spoken of, a reason for it is added not so ;
1. For
the passage in the Proverbs, as I have said before,
not the Substance, but the manhood of the Word
signifies, ;
place
second to being. For things which are in formation and^^^ ^'j.
creation are made specially that they may be and exist % and
next they have to do, whatever the "Word bids them, as may be
seen in the case of all things. For Adam was created, not
that he might work, but that first he might be man for it ;
5. Sept,'
'^^^^ ^^'^''^ saith the Lord, who formed Me from the womh to
some son, when the servants were lost, and in the hands of
the enemy by their own carelessness, and need was urgent,
were sent by his father to succour and recover them,
-
p. 291. and on setting out were to put over him the like dress " with
them, and should fashion himself as they, lest the capturers,
recognising him^ as the master, should take to flight and
prevent his descending to those who were hidden under the
earth by them and then were any one to inquire of him,
;
why he did so, were to make answer, "My Father thus formed
and prepared me for his works," while in thus speaking, he
neither implies that he is a servant nor one of the works, nor
VILT^^' quent charge given him over the works, in the same way the —
p. 304, Lord also, having put over Him our flesh, and being found
in fashion as a man, if He were questioned by those who
saw Him thus and marvelled, would say, The Lord created
Me the heginning of His tcays for His icorlcs, and He formed Chap.
A- A..
Me gather together Israel.
to
3. This again the Spirit foretels in the Psalms, saying, sui)r. 20,
Thou didst set Him over the ivorks of Thine hands ; which Heb. 2,
by Him upon His holy hill of Sion. And as, when He ^^P^-
shone* in the body upon Sion, He had not His beginning of '^'^^Vm'
existence or of reign, but being God's AVord and everlasting of the
Kin?, He vouchsafed that His kingdom should shine in a ^°^y
. . . Spirit
human way in Sion, that redeeming them and us from the Serap. i.
^'
sin which reigned in them, He might bring them under
' '
pass
'
for us. Accordingly, though He
He y^vofj.i-thus speaks, yet "
Abraham was made, and Israel was made after Abraham, and
Framer of the creation, and His works are evidently later than
Himself, and He created signifies, not His beginning of
being, but the economy which took place for the works,
which He efiected in the flesh. For it became Hira, being
other than the works, nay rather their Framer, to take upon
Himself their renovation^, that, whereas He is created for us, '
r- 251,
works, that His creation for the works might signify His
becoming man for their renovation.
4. And this is usual with divine Scripture when
"^
;
for it sig-
Father is, but not for any reason, neither must we seek
John 1, the reason of that Radiance. Thus it is written, /// the
beginning was theWord, and the Word was icith God, and
3
Naz. theWord was God; and the wherefore it assigns not ^; but
John 1,
when the Word loas made flesh, then it adds the reason why,
^^-
saying. And dwelt among us. And again the Apostle saying,
Phil. 2, Who being in the form of God, has not introduced the reason,
~
till He tooh on Him the form of a servant ; for then he con-
^
oTToAe-
Himself, He has spoken absolutely
^
I in the Father and the ;
infr. 62.' Father in Me, and / and the Father are one, and He that
John 14, ]^(ii]i gg^f^ ]\fg f/fg Father, and / am the Light of
/^f-if/^ ggg^^
6. 9. 10. . .
1
0, 30. the ivorld, and I am
Truth ; not setting down in every
the
'
case the reason, nor the wherefore, lest He should seem
second to those things for which He was made. For that
reason would needs take precedence of Him, without which
not even He Himself had been brought into being. Paul,
Rom. 1, for instance, separated an Apostle for the which the
Gospel,
Lord had promised afore by the Frophets, was thereby made
subordinate to the Gospel, of which he was made minister,
and John, being chosen to prepare the Lord's way, was
made subordinate Lord but the Lord, not being made
to the ;
him up at the last day. And again; / am come a light John 12,
46.
into the world, that ivhosoever believeth on Me, should
not abide in darkness. And again He says; To this end John 18,
37.
was I born, and for this cause came I into the world,
that I should bear witness unto the truth. And John has
written; For this teas manifested the Son of God, that He 1 John .S,
8.
e T-wo ends of our Lord's Incarna- exposed to death a first-fruit and pre- ;
tion are here mentioned ; that He might serving this immaculate and guiltless of
die for us, and that He might renew sin, He surrenders it for death to seize
us, answering nearly to those specified upon as well as others, and satiate its in-
in Rom. 4, 25. "who was delivered satiableness and th^n on the ground of
;
for our offences and raised again for its want of equity against that first-fruit,
our justification." The general object He put a stop to its iniquitous tyranny
of His coming, including both of these, over others." Eran. iii. p. 196", 7- Vigil.
is treated of in Incarn. 4 — 20. or rather Thaps. contr. Eutych. i.
p. 49G. (B. P.
in the whole Tract, and in the two ed. 162-1,) and S. Leo speaks of the
books against Apollinaris. It is diffi- whole course of redemption, i. e. in-
cult to accurate references under
make carnation, atonement, regeneration,
the former head, (vid. iiifr. note on (15 justification, &c. as one sacrament,
and 67.) without including the lalter. not drawing the line distinctly between
" Since all men had to the several agents, elements, or stages
pay tlie debt of
death, on which account especially He in it, but considering it to lie in the in-
came on earth, therefore after giving tercommunion of Christ's and our per-
proofs of His Divinity from His works, sons. Thus he that our Lord " took
says
next He offered a sacrifice for all, &c." on Him our infirmities which come of
all
the passage then runs on into the other sin without sin ;" and " the most cruel
" none could
fruit of His death, ibid. 20. Vid. supr. pains and death," because
p. 291. where he speaks of
our Lord be rescued from mortality, unless He, in
offering both Himself and us to God, and whom our common nature was innocent,
" and allowed Himself to die by the hands of
off'ering our flesh," p. 294. p. 23.
Also infr. Orat. iv. 6.
" When He is the impious;" " unde," he continues,
" in se credentibus et sacramenlnm
said to hunger, to weep and weary and
to cry Eloi, which are human affections, condidit et exemplum, ut unum appre-
He receives them from us and offers to henderent renascendo, alterum seque-
His Father, interceding for us, that in rentur imitando." Serm. 63, 14. He
Him they may be annulled." And so speaks of His fortifying us against our
Theodoret, "Whereas He had an im- passions and infirmities, both saci'a-
mortal nature. He willed according to menlo snsceptiotih and exemplo. Serm.
"
equity to put a stop to death's power, (i5, 2. and of a duplex remedium cujus
taking on Him first from those who were aliud in Sacramento, aliud in exemplo."
358 If created only for a purpose, He is not a creature.
Disc, resurrection had not been, unless there had been death ;
and
how had death been, unless He had had a mortal body ?
6. This the Apostle, learning from Him, thus sets forth,
Hcb. 2, Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and
blood. He also Himself likewise took part of the same; that
through death He
might destroy him that had the power of
death, that is, the devil, and deliver them who through fear
of death loere all their life-time subject to bondage. And,
1 Cor. Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection
15 21
Rom. 8 ^f ^^^^ dead. And again. For what the Law could not do, in
''">• •*•
that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending His own
Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned
sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of the Law might
be fulfilled in who walk not after the flesh but after
i(s,
John 3, the Spirit. And John says, For God sent not His Son into
17.
the \corld to condemn the world, but that the world through
Serm. 67, 5. also 6f), 5. El'^ewhere 70, 5. vid. also more or less in Serm.
he makes the strong statement, "The pp. 76. 93. 98, 9. 141.249.257,8. 271.
Lord's passion is continued on [pro- fin. and Epist. pp. 1291, l.'i63, 4. At
ducitur] even to the end of the world ;
other times, however, the atonement
and as in His Saints He is honoured is more distinctly separated from its
Himself, and Himself is loved, and in circumstances, pp. 13G, 198, 310. but
the poor He Himself is fed, is clothed it is very diiBcult to draw the line.
Himself, so in all who endure trouble The tone of his teaching is throughout
for righteousness' sake, does He Him- characteristic of the Fathers, and
very
self suffer together [compatitur], Serm. like that of S. Athanasius.
He is created, in that human nature in Him is created. 359
twain are created, and these are in His body, reasonably tben, Chap.
not created for us, we are not created in Him and, if not ;
T, .
— says,
,, and if in Christ we are created,' then it is not He who is
Eph. 2, ^
10. created, but we in Him and thus the words Jle created are
;
for our sake. For because of our need, the Word, though
being Creator, endured words which are used of creatures ;
which are not proper to Him, as being the "Word, but are
ours who are created in Him. And as, since the Father is
Prov. 8,
always, so is His Word, and alwaj^s being, always says, I
John 14 ^''^^ daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him, and I
'4- am in the Father and the Father in Me; so, when for our
need He became man, consistently does He use language, as
ourselves, The Lord hath created Me, that, by His dwelling
in the flesh, sin might perfectly be expelled from the flesh,
and we might have a free mind ^. For what ought He, when
made man, to say? "In the beginning I was man?" this
were neither suitable to Him nor true ;
and as it beseemed
not to say this, so it is natural and proper in the case of man
to say. He created and He made Him.
9. On this account then the reason of He created is added,
namely, the need of the works ;
and where the reason is
had been created, still the Word of God was, and the Word
was God. His becoming man would not have taken
And
place, had not the need of men become a cause. The Son
then is not a creature.
2 B
CHAPTER XXL
TEXTS EXPI-AINED ; SIXTHLY, PKOVERBS viii. 22. CONTINUED,
Ps. 2, 7- for he has not said " I made," but / hegat, and He begets
Ps. 45, 1. Me, and My heart has burst with a good Word. And in the
instance of the creation, J>^ the beginning He made; but in
John 1, the instance of the Son, In the beginning was the Word.
2. And there is this difference, that the creatures are made
'^
ii-Kh T^v upon the beginning ^ and have a beginning of existence
"^'^''''
connected with an interval wherefore also what is said of
;
His work which God began to make '. Therefore the creatures '
^p^'^-ro
began to be made ;
but the Word of God, not having begin-
ning^ of being, certainly did not begin to be, nor begin to come
-
a.pxhv,
^ "'
to be, but was ever. And the works have their beginning in
their making, and their beginning precedes their coming to
be but the Word, not being of things which come to be,
;
by and
their becoming^, from some beginning doth God begin '
supr.
to make them through the Word, that it may be known that notVg'.
they were not before their generation but the Word has ;
between the Offspring and things made, and shew that the
Offspring is a Son, not begun from any beginning, but eternal ;
Deut.
passage is this. Is not He thy Father that hath bought thee ?
'
hath He not made thee and created thee ? And shortly after
ibid. 18. in the same Song he says. Of the Hock that begat thee thou
art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee.
Now the meaning conveyed in these passages is very remark-
able ;
for He says not first He begat, lest that term should be
taken as indiscriminate with He made, and these men should
have a pretence for saying, " Moses tells us indeed that God
Gen. 1,
CI o Let Us make man, but he soon after
said from the beginning,
26
says himself. Of the Rock that begat thee thow art unmindful,
as if the terms were indifferent ;
for offspring and work are
the same." But after the words bought and made, he has
added last of all begat, that the sentence might carry its own
interpretation ;
for in the word made he accurately denotes
what belongs to men by nature, to be works and things
made; but in the word begat he shews God's lovingkindness
b The technical sense of eixrePeia, and almost translates it, Apost. Creed,
Art. 3. "
affe'/Ssia, pietas, impietas, for or/^orfoxy, Although it maybe thought
heterodoxy, has been noticed supr. p. I, sufficient for the mystery of the Incar-
note a. and derived from 1 Tim. iii. l(i. nation, that, when our Saviour was
The word is contrasted ch. iv. 8. with conceived and born. His Mother was
the (perhaps Gnostic) "profane and a Virgin, though whatsoever should
old-wives' fables," and with
" have followed after could have no re-
bodily
exercise." A
curious instance of the flective operation upon the first-fruit of
force of the word as a turning point in her womb .
yet the peculiar eminency,
. .
by Cave and Garnier, where it is said caution and piety or orthodoxy ; " or-
that the denial of S. Mary's perpetual thodoxy because you went along the
virginity, though "lovers of Christ
do royalway of Divine Scripture in your
not bear to hear that Grod's Mother ever remarks, rightly confessing the word
ceased to be Virgin," yet "does no injury of truth, not venturing to declare any
to the doctrine of religion, fxriSey toj ttjs thing of your oivn ability without Scrip
-
exercised towards men after He had created them. And since Chap.
XXI.
they were ungrateful upon this, thereupon Moses reproaches
them, saving- first, Do ye thus requite the Lord ? and then Deut.
"'
adds. Is not He thy Father that hath bought thee ? Hath
He not made thee and created thee ? And next he says.
They sacrificed unto devils, not to God, to gods ichoniMd. n.
they knew not, to neio gods that came newly up, whom your
fathers feared not; of the Rock that begat thee thou art
unmindful. For God not only created them to be men, but §. o9.
called them to be sons, as having begotten them. For the
term begat is here as elsewhere expressive of a Son, as He
says by the Prophet, I have begat sons and exalted them ; and
generally, when
Scripture wishes to signify a son, it does so,
not by the term created, but undoubtedly by that of begat.
4. And this John seems to say, He gave to them power to John i ,
becomes, that is, when men, His creatures, receive into their
hearts, as the Apostle says, the Spirit of His Son, crying,
Abba, Father ". And these are they who, having received the
^
p- 57.
they might know that from the beginning they are creatures, but
when according to grace they are said to be begotten, as sons,
still no less than before are men works according to nature.
^. 60. 6, And
that creature and offspring are not the same, but
differ from each other in nature and the signification of the
'•'l^-
If then the Word
were by nature and in His Substance a ^
uote g.' creature, and there were no difference between offspring and
creature. He would not have added, He begat Me, but had
been satisfied with He created, as if that term implied He
begat; but, as the case stands, after saying. He created Me
a beginning of His urtgs for His works. He has added, not
simply begat Me, but with the connection of the conjunction
But, as guarding thereby the term created, when He says.
But all the hills He begat Me.
before For begat Me suc-
ceeding in such close connection to created Me, makes the
2
one, and shews that created is said with an
ch. 20. meaning object ",
but that begat Me is prior to created Me. For as, if He had
said the reverse, "The Lord begat Me," and went on, "But
before the hills He created Me," created would certainly
•=
rb;/ iv T}fjuu vlov. vid. also siipr. 10. fin. iii. 23 — 25. and de Deer. .^1 fin.
circ. fin. 66. init. and rhv 4u avroTs oi- also p. 250, note d. p. 360, note g. infr.
koOj-to Ad^oi'. 61. init. Also Orat. i. 50 notes on 79-
The Son begotten fii'st, created afterwards. 3G7
added But
begat, so
He -^ — ^-
which follow created, also follow begat Me; but in the case
of created is added beginning of ways, but of begat Me, He
" He
says not, begat me as a beginning," but before all He
begat Me. But He who is before all is not a beginning of
but if other than all, (in which "all "
' '
note -f*^'
;
1.
Word, being other than all things and before all, afterwards
iscreated a beginning of the ways for works, because He
became man, that, as the Apostle has said, He who is the
Beginning and First-born from the dead, in all things might Col. i,
adoption and grace, then has the Word also, when in grace
towards us He became man, said, The Lord hath created Me.
8. And in the next place, when He put on a created nature and
sense of irpwroTOKOs rrjs Kriaeus has 7tie)i, (i. e. from the dead,) and is
equi-
been commented on supr. p. 27^. As far valent to the " beginning of
ways."
as Athan.'s discussion proceeds in this
368 Our Lord is First-born, as the Beginning of the neic creation.
Disc, ^s ^
that He was made man for us, and our brother by simi- ' -^
II. _ ,
Orat. iii. forth we, becoming incorporate with It, are saved, after Its
31. note,
pattern. For in It the Lord becomes our guide to the
()°10 9 Kingdom of Heaven and to His own Father, saying, I am
the way and the door, and "through Me all must enter."
Rev.
s.
1, Whence also is He said to be First-born from the dead, not
that He
died before us, for we had died first but because ;
^^y^"-
is Onh^-begotten, as indeed He is, First-born needs some
explanation ;
but if He be really First-born, then He is not
urged against Bull supr. p. 278, is ad- gory Theologus and Basil the Divine
duced against him by Wessel also in drew from this work as from a fount the
his answer to Cremer. (Nestorianisraus beautiful and clear streams of their
Redivivus, p. 223.) All the words own writings which they poured out
(says Athan.) which are proper to the against the heresy, I suppose we shall
Son, and describe Him fitly, are ex- not be far from the mark." Cod. 140.
pressive of what is internal to the And so of S. Cyril and, as far as his
Divine Nature, Begotten, Word,
as subjects allow, of S. Kpiphanius.
Wisdom, Glory, Hand, &c. but (as he ^ We now come to a third and wider
adds presently) the first-born, like be- sense of TrparSroKO^, as found (not in
(/inning of ways, is relative to creation ; Rom. 8, 29. and Col. 1, 18. but) in Col.
and therefore cannot denote our Lord's 1,15. where by creation Athan. under-
"
essence or Divine subsistence, but some- stands " all things visible and invisible
thing temporal, an office, character, or As then/br was just now taken
/Aewo/'Xrs
the like. to argue that created was used in a
This passage is imitated by Theo- relative and restricted sense, the same
doret. in Coloss. i. 15. but the passages is shewn as regards first-born by the
from the Fathers referrible to these Ora- words for in Him all things were
tions are too many to enumerate. " If created.
370 The First-horn of all is not one of all.
Disc.
reason, but absolutely said of Him, The
'
it is Only-hegotten
II.
John
Son which bosom of the Father ; but the word First-
is in the
1,
18. born has again the creation as a reason in connection witb it,
Col. 1, which Paul proceeds to say, for in Him all things were
16.
created. But if all the creatures were created in Him, He
is other than the creatures, and is not a creature, but the
§.63. Creator of the creatures. Not then because He was from
the Father was He called First-born, but because in Him
the creation came to be "" and as before the creation He was
;
" the owner of a house." "First-born say, "Solomon is wisest of the heathen,"
of creation" is like "author, type, or according to ^Milton's imitation " the
life of creation." As, after calling our fairest of her daughters Eve." Vid. as
Lord in His own nature "a light, " we regards the very word irpiiTos, John 1,
might proceed to say that He was also 15; and supr. p. 321, r. 5. also irAeiarr]!/
"a " Arch-
to the
light creation," or 7jefjinpoadev i^ovaiav 3 !Machab. 7, 21.
luminary," so He was not only the Accordingly as in the comparative to
Eternal Son, but a " Son to creation," obviate this exclusion, we put in the
" Hence St.
an archetypal Son." word other, (ante alios immanior omnes,)
Paul goes on at once to say, " for in so too in the Greek superlative, " So-
Him things were made," not simply
all crates is wisest of o/Aer heathen." Atha-
"
by and for," as at the end of the nasius then says in this passage, that
" first-born of creatures "
verse; or as Athan. says here, "be- implies that
cause in Him the creation came to be." our Lord was not a creature whereas ;
of all the children of Jacob °, but of Jacob himself and his Chap.
brethren ;
lest he should be thought to be some other beside
the childi'en of Jacob. Nay, even concerning the Lord Himself
the Apostle says not, "that He may become First-born of
all," lest He be thought to bear a body other than ours, but
brethren, because of the likeness of the flesh.
Rom. 8,
among many '
If then the Word
were one of the creatures, Scripture
also
would have said that He was First-born of other creatures ;
brought it to pass that in His Word, not only all things Qoi. \,
'"
consist, but the creation itself, of which the Apostle speaks,
Sept. Wessel considers that Athan. lievers, as having created all things, and
understands "first-born" to mean new created all the predestined." p. 216.
" Yet what Athan. says in G4, init. is
heir," as in the case of the Patriarchs ;
and he almost seems to have these words surely inconsistent with this. Vid. also
in his mind, (because none other to his contr. Gent. 41, f. where the text Col.
Disc,
firgt, those that come after Him may abide \ as depending on
iT the AVord as a beo-innino' ^
vid. p. 32, 13. And I think that the irreligious men themselves will be
S 64 shamed from such a thought for if the case stands not as ;
2
p. '.'50, we have said, but they will rule it that He is First-born of
the whole creation as in substance^ a creature
i
3(;!g_ among creatures,
••• 1- letthem reflect that they will be conceiving Him as brother
and fellow of the things without reason and life. Por of the
whole creation these also are parts and the First-born must ;
be first indeed in point of time but only thus, and in kind and
*
p. 309.
*
similitude must be the same with all. How then can they
say this without exceeding all measures of irreligion? or
q Hedoes not here say with Asterius He frst-born, in that human nature
that Godcould not create man immedi- isadopted in Him. ~What is here said
ately, for theWord is God, but that He of wpcuTOTOKos is surely larger than
did not create him without at the same Wessel's interpretation of the word,
time infusing a grace or presence from Ratlier S. Leo
gives S. Athanasius's
Himself into his created nature to en- sense ;
'•
Human
nature has been taken
able it to endure His external plastic into so close an union by the Son of
hand ;
in other words, that he was God, that not only in that Man who is
'
created in Him, not as something ex- the first-born of the whole creation/
ternal to Him, (in spite of the Slo. supr. but even in all His saints is one and
i/ie same Christ." Serm. 63. 3. i.e. the
notem.) vid. supr. p. 32,noteq.andGent.
47. where the a'Li7KaTa)3ii(ns is spoken of. title yirst-borti has reference not to our
"
As God created Him, in that he Lord as heir, but as represeiitative of
created human nature in Him, so is His Brethren.
As He is First-born, so Beginning of ways. 373
hear and tear themselves to pieces', because His coining into Chap.
XXI.
the world is what makes Him called First-born of all and ; •
p. :il4,
thus the Son is the Father's Only-begotten, because He noie o.
15, 20.
Him i)i all things to liam the pre-eminence, therefore He is Col. 1,
18.
created a beginning of icays, that we, walking along it and
entering through Him who says, / am the Way and the Door,
and partaking of the knowledge of the Father, may also hear
the words, Blessed are the imdefiled in the Way, and Blessed Ps. 119,
].
are tlie purefor they shall see God. And thus since
in heart, Matt. 5,
§. 65.
it is fitting now to say, in what sense He is beginning of
ways. For when the first way, which was through Adam
was lost, and in place of paradise we deviated unto death,
and heard the words, Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt Gen. 3,
19.
s Thus he considers that " first- calls the Son, " ars qusedam omnipo-
"
born is mainly a title, connected with tentis atque sapientis Dei, plena omnium
the Incarnation, and also connected rationum viventium incommutabilium."
with our Lord's office at the creation, de Trin. vi. 11. And so Athan. infr.
(vid. parallel of Priesthood, p. 292, note KpwroTOKOs els anoSei^iv ttjs tSjv -naviuiv
m. p. 303, note e.) In each economy 5ia TOV viov Sii/xiuvpyias Kal vloTToii^ffiois.
it has the same meaning; it belongs to iii.9. fin. Eusebius, in commenting on
Him as the type, idea, or rule on which the very passage which Athan. is dis-
the creature was made or new-made, cussing, (Prov. 8, 22.) presents a re-
and the life by which it is sustained. markable contrast to these passages, as
Both economies are mentioned Incarn. making the Son, not the ihia, but the
13, 14. And so elKwv koI tvwos Trphs e.xternal minister of the Father's iSeo.
" The Father
apfT7]u. Orat. i. 51. where vid. (supr. p. designed (Siervwov) and
254.) note i. tvttov tivo. Ka^Avns and prepared with consideration, how and 0/
viroypa/uLfxhi', iii. 20. vid. also 21. iv ainw u'hat shape, measure, and parts ....
7'1/j.ev TrpoTfTVTrotififi'Oi infr. 7'j. init. He And He watching {ivarefi^oiv) the
came tvttov eiKAyos iiQi7vai 78. init. t7]v Father's thoughts and alone beholding
Tov apx^Tinrov vKdaiv ai/affTrjffacrdai the depths in Him, went about the
eauTo". contr. Apol. ii 5. Also Kare- work, subserving the Father's orders,
cT<ppayi(TdT}fj.(i' t5 apxirvwov ttjs
els [viifxacTL) .... as a skilful painter,
ei/cdcos. Cyr. in Joan. p. 91. olov a-rrh taking the archetypal ideas from the
rivos a-pxv^ Nyss. Catei;h. p. 504. fin. Father's thoughts. He transferred them
And so a;;ain, as to the original creation, to the substances of the works." de
the Word is Itia koL ivlpy^ia, of all Eccl. Theol. pp. 164, 5. S. Cyril
material things. Athan. Leg. 10. t} says, what will serve as a contrast,
iSea OTTep Kdyov elpr)Kaat. Clem. Strom. " The Father shews the Son what He
V. 3. ISeav iSeajv Kal a.px'i)V KfKTfOV does Himself, not as if setting it before
rhv TTpOOTOTOKOV TTCtffTJS KTlffiCilS OrigBtl. Him drawn out on a tablet, or teach-
" Whatever God for He knows all
contr. Ccls. vi. (;4. fin. ing as ignorant ;
note c. the first man had made it dead through the transgression,
"
^i\6s mere " man then, made of earth only, such as we are become
• from the transgression, could not be he. For in the first
creation, men had become unfaithful, and through them that
first creation had been lost and there was need of some one
;
else to renew the first creation, and preserve the new which
'
§. 66. ^e might have the pre-eminence. For if, as has been said,
because of the resurrection from the dead He is called a
beginning, and then a resurrection took place when He,
t Vid.
supr. p. 250, note d. p. 254, the corruptible flesh according to the
note k. p. 360, note g.
" could We measure of its own nature, ineffably,
not otherwise," says S. Irenseus, " re- and inexpressibly, and as He alone
ceive incorruption and immortality, knows. He might bring it to His own
but by being united to incorruption and life, and render it partaker through
immortality. But how could this be. Himself of God and the Father. . . .
that corruption might be absorbed by through the Spirit, turning our natural
incorruption and mortal by immortality, corruption into incorruption and chang-
that we might receive the adoption of ing death to its contrary." Cyril, in
Sons." Hser. iii. 19, n. 1. " He took Joan. lib. ix. cir. fin. This is the doc-
part of flesh and blood, that is, He be- trine of S. Athanasius and S. Cyril, one
came man, whereas He was Life by may say, passim.
nature, .... that uniting Himself to
He died, paid the debt, rose again, 375
had ^ Chap.
beai'inff
° our flesh, ffiven Himself to death for us, it is
. XXI.
evident that His words, He created Me a beginning of ways,
'
"
Fur to the body death was proper ;
and in like raanner to
the bodily presence are the words proper, The Lord created
Me a beginning of His icaijs. For since the Saviour was thus
created according to the flesh, and had become a beginning
of things new created, and had our first fruits, viz. that human
flesh which He
took to Himself, therefore after Him, as is
fit, is created also the people to come, David saying, This
Ps. \i-2,
Where I am, there ye shall be also ; so that we may say, •^"'^" ' ^ '
16. And again, since God's work, that is, man, though created *
loving -kindness towards me; despise not then the works of^'
Thine own hands therefore the perfect Word of God puts
;)
was a human body, though by a new consequence it held that our Lord did
marvel, subsisted of the Virgin alone,
it not suffer and die, except by miracle, vid.
yet, being mortal, died after the com- Leont. c. Nest. ii.
(Canis. t. i.
pp. 5fi3,
nion course of the like natures." Incarn. 4, 8.) vid. supr. pp. 241—3, notes h
20, e. also 8, b. 18. init. Orat. iii. 5fi. and i also infr. p. 389, note c.
; And
And so ruv 6,vdfiwKov craOpiiiQivra. Orat. further, note on iii. 57.
iv. 33. And so S. Leo in his Tome lays ^ avfl' ^laSiv tV
ocpeiX^u d7ro5i5oi/j,
down that in the Incarnation, suscepta and so the Lord's death Avrpof Trduruiv.
est ab seternitate mortalitas. Ep. 28. 3. Incarn. V. D. 25. \vrpov Kadapaiov.
And S. Austin, Utique vulnerabile atque Naz. Orat. 30, 20. fin. also supr. !). c. 13,
mortale corpus habuit [Christus] contr. b. 14, a. 47, b, c. 55, c. (i7, d. In illud
Faust, siv. 2. A Eutychian sect denied Oinn. 2 fin.
this doctrine (the
Aphthartodocetse),
376 that we might reign in Him in heaven.
Disc.
II. .
" to man. Now immortality
Himself, perfect what was wantino:
_ _
fuayts
Himself, who is from the Father, has put on the flesh, and
No creature, none but the Son, could have undone sin. 377
Chap.
become man. For if, being a creature, He had become man, XXI.
man had remained just what he was, not joined to God for ;
or what succour had come from like to like, when one as well
as other needed it
^
? And how, were the Word a creature,
had He power to undo God's sentence, and to remit sin,
whereas it is written in the Prophets, that this is God's doing?
For who is a God like unto Thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and Mic. 7,
Lord is He who has undone it, as He says Himself, Unless ^i^- John
the Son shall make you free ; and the Son, who made free,
has shewn in truth that He is no creature, nor one of things
generate, but the proper Word and Image of the Father's
Substance, who at the beginning sentenced, and alone re-
mitteth sins. For since it is said in the Word, Dust thou art,
and unto dust thou shalt return, suitably through the Word
Himself and in Him the freedom and the undoing of the
condemnation has come to pass.
c Vid.
p. 15, note e. also p. 251. and stranger to the original prevarication
" could we be How and innocent, to profit the rest both by
p. 303, with note e.
partakers of that adoption of sons, un- his pattern and his merit. Since
less through the Son we had received natural generation hindered this, . the .
from Him that communion with Him, Lord of David became his Son." Leon.
"
unless His Word had been made flesh,
'
Serra. 28, n. 3. Seek neither a bro-
and had communicated it to us." Iren. ther' for thy redemption, but one who
Hffir. iii. 20. surpasses thy nature nor a mere
;
"Therefore was He made man, man,' but a man who is God, Jesu3
'
tl
that, what was as though given to Him, Christ, who alone is able to make pro-
might be transferred to us for a mere ; pitiation for us all. . . One thing has
.
man had not merited this, nor had the been found sufficient for all men at
Word Himself needed it. He was united once, which was given as the price of
therefore to us, &c." infr. Orat. iv. f>. vid. ransom of our soul, the holy and most
also iii. 33 init. "There was need He precious blood of our Lord Jesus Christ,
should be both man and God for unless ;
which He poured out for us all." Basil,
He were man. He could not be killed in Psalm. 48, n. 4. " One had not been
;
unless HewereGod, He would have been sufficient instead of all, had it been
2 C
378 God could have forgiven u-ithout the Incarnation,
transgressors ;
but He did it after the ark. He could too,
without Moses, have spoken the word only and have brought
the people out of Egypt but it profited to do it through
;
Moses. And God was able without the judges, to save His
people but it was profitable for the people that for a season
;
sible for Moses to go up, and for them hearing the word near
Orat. 19, 13. Theodor. adv. Gent. vi. He wished it, even in a day to bring
p. 876, 7. August, de Trin. xiii. 13. on the whole rain [of the delude] ? in
It is denied in a later age by S. Anselm, a day, nay in a moment ?" Chrysost.
but S. Thomas and the schoolmen side in Gen. Horn. 24, 7- He proceeds to
with the Fathers, vid. Petav. Incarn. apply this principle to the pardon of
"
ii. 13. However, it will be observed sin. Now, while this short portion
from what follows that Athan. thought of Holy Lent still remains to you, ye
the Incarnation still absolutely esseii- shall be able both to wash away your
tial for the renewal of human nature sinsand to gain much mercy from God.
in holiness. In like manner in the For not many days, .nor time doth the
Incarn. after saying that to accept mere Lord require, but even in these two
repentance from sinners would not have weeks, if we will, shall we make a
been fitting, ivKoyov, he continues, great correction of our offences. For
" Nor does
repentance recover us from if the Ninevites, after
shewing a re-
our natural state, it does but stop us pentance of three days. He repaid with
from our sins. Had there been but a so much mercy, &c." On the subject
fault committed, and not a subsequent of God's power as contrasted with His
corruption, repentance
had been well; acts, Petavius brings together the
but if, &c." 7- That is, we might have statements of the Fathers, de Deo, v.
been | ardoned, we could not have been 6.
it was in His power, and so the curse had been undone, the
power had been shewn of Him who gave the word, but man
had become such as Adam was before the transgression,
having received grace from without^, and not having it united
to the body (for he was such when he was placed in Para-
;
20. Again, if the Son were a creature, man had remained §. 69.
mortal as before, not being joined to God for a creature ;
it'; nor would a portion of the creation have been the P- '^•
forth, as if all had died through Him, the word of that sen-
tence might be accomplished, (for all died in Christ,) and all 2 Cor. 5,
15.
S Athan. here seems to say that Adam a man has justice if he will the second
;
in a state of innocence had but an ex- does more, for by it he also wills, and
ternal divine assistance, not an habitual wills so strongly and loves so ardently,
grace ; however, is contrary to
this, as to overcome the will of the flesh
his own statements already referred to, lusting contrariwise to the will of the
and the general doctrine of the fathers, spirit," &c. do Corr. et Grat. 31. vid.
vid. e. g. Cyril, in Joann. v. 2. He also infr. p. 389, note b. and S. Cyril,
" Our forefather Adam seems to have
must be interpreted by S. Austin, who
uses similar yet plainer language in con- gained wisdom, not in time, as we, but
trasting the grace of the tirst and the appears perfect in understanding from
Second Adam, " An aid was [given the very first moment of his formation,
to the first Adam] which he might preserving in hirajclf the illumination
desert when he willed, in which he given him by nature from God as yet
might remain if he willed, not by untroubled and pure, and leaving the •
which it came to pass that he willed, dignity of his nature unpractised on,"
But a more powerful grace is given to &c. in Joan. p. 7>>.
the Second. The first is that by which
2 C: ^
380 nor Satan conquered, nor death aholhhed.
Disc,
through Him might thereupon become free from sin and from
^
1
g, /.
the curse which came upon it, and might truly abide for ever,
vuxTiv, risen from the dead and clothed in immortality and incorrup-
372,^r. 1.
tio^- For, the "Word being clothed in the flesh, as has many
p. 385, times been explained, every wound of the serpent began to be
Gent. utterly staunched from out it and whatever evil sprung from
;
Serm
^^® motious of the be cut away, and with these death
flesh, to
Maj.de also was abolished, the companion of sin, as the Lord
John 14,
Himself says. The 2'>^'ince of this u-orkl cometh, and findeth
30. exet
nothing in Me; and /or this end .teas He manifested, as
forward are joined, even we, to the Word. And being joined
'
Adelph. 4. a. Serap. i. 24, e. and p. 360, 34. fin. 38, b. 39, d. 48. fin. 53. For
note g. and iii. 33. " The Word was our becoming deol vid. Orat. iii. 25.
made flesh that we, partaking of the deol Kara x^P'"- Cyr. in Joan. p. 74.
Spirit, might be made gods." supra, p. 6eo(popovfii6a Orat. iii. 23, c. 41, a. 45
23. " He deified that which He put on." init. XP^'^'^'^'P'^P"^- i^i'^- 6fov/n€6a. iii. 48
p. 240. vid. also pp. 23, 151, 236, fin. 53. Theodor. Hist. i.
p. 846. init.
The Mediator must be true God and true Man. 381
in Himself, and thus might introduce all us into the kingdom Chap.
XXT.
of heaven after His likeness. For man had not been made '
1
TxaKiv
unless He had been His natural and true Word who had
;
for in 2vid.
p. 345,
neither case had been of profit to us men, whether the
it
note g.
Word were not true and naturally Son of God, or the flesh
not true which He assumed. But surely He took true flesh,
'
Vid. also Athan. Comm. in Luc. ap. have persuaded the Cliurch of God in all
Coll. Nov. p. 43. This title, which is ages to believe that she still continued
commonly applied to S. Mary by later in the same virginity, and therefore is
writers, is found Epiph. Hser. 7^, 5. to be acknowledged as the Ever- Virgin
Didym. Trin. i. 27. p. 84. Rutin. Fid. Mary." Creed, Art. 3. (vid. supr. p.
i.4.3. Lepor. ap. Cassian. Incarn. i. 5. 3C4, note b.) He adds that "many
Leon. Ep. 28, 2. Csesarius has aei- have taken the boldness to deny this
nals. Qu. 20. On the doctrine itself truth, because not recorded in the
vid. a letter of S. Ambrose and his sacred writ," but "with no success."
brethren to Siricius, and the Pope's He replies to the argument from
letter in response. (Const. Ep. Pont. "until" in Matt. 1, 25. by referring
p. 669— C82.) As we are taught by to Gen. 28, 15. Deut. 34, G. 1 Sam.
the predictions of the Prophets that a 15, 35. 2 Sam. 6, 23. Matt. 28, 20.
Virgin was to be Mother of the pro- He might also have referred to Psalm
mised ^lessias, so are we assured by 110, 1. I Cor. 15, 25. which are the
the infallible relation of the Evangelists, more remarkable, because they were
that this Mary " was a Virgin when urged by the school of Marcellus as a
she bare Him. Neither was the act
. . .
proof that our Lord's kingdom would
of parturition more contradictory to vir- have an end, and are explained
ginity, than the former of conception. by Euseb. Eccl. Theol. iii. 13, 14.
Thirdly, we believe the Mother of our Vid. also Cyr. Cat. 15, 29; where
Lord to have been, not only before and the true meaning of "until" (which
after His nativity, but also for ever, the may be transferred to !Matt. 1, 25.) is
" He who
most immaculate and blessed Virgin. . . well broughtout. is
King
The peculiar einineiicy and unparalleled before He subdued His enemies, how
privilege of that Mother, the special shall He not the rather be
King, after
honour and reverence due unto her He has got the mastery over them?"
Son and ever paid by her, the regard vid. also note on S. Thomas's Catena,
of that Holy Ghost who came upon O. T. in loc. vid. also Suicer de Symb.
her, the singular goodness and piety of Niceno-Const. p. 231. Spanheim. Dub.
Joseph, to whom she was espoused, Evang. 28, n.
382 Our Lord is Qod, because the Hand of God.
"
'
'-r— God, tliouffli Ariomaniacs rave ;
-and in tliat flesh has come
-^v yap, . .
*
p. 91, to pass the beginning new creation, He being created
^
of our
3
°/p
A' man for our sake, and having made for us that new way, as
origin, j^^g been said.
note d.' 22. The Word then is neither creature nor work; for crea-
§• ^^-
ture, thing made, work, are all one;and were He creature and
thing made. He would also be work. Accordingly He has not
" He created Me a nor " He made Me with the
said, work,"
works," lest He should appear to be in nature and substance''
^
p. 345,
^ " He created Me to make
a creature nor, ; works," lest, on
the other hand, according to the perverseness of the ir-
religious. He should seem as an instrument
* ^
opyavov, made for our
iii. 31. sake. Nor again has He declared, "He created Me before
the works," lest, as He really is before all, as an Offspring, so,
"
if created also before the works. should give " Oifspring He
and Se created the same meaning. But He has said with
exact discrimination for the u'orks ; as much as to say,
6
p. 298, *',
Is. 66, 2. the Hand and Wisdom of God, who Himself says, AT// hand
hath made all these things; and David says in the Psalm,
Ps. 102, And Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundations
^'
of the earth, and work of Thy hands;
the heavens are the
Ps. 143, and again, in the hundred and forty-second Psalm, / do
remember the time past, J muse upon all T^iy works, yea
I exercise myself in the works of Thy hands. Therefore
if by the Hand of God the works are wrought, and it is
John 1, wu'itten that all things were made through the Word, and
^'"^^^^^^'^ Sim was made not one thing, and
I'cor 8 again. One Lord
9.
Jesus, through whom are all things, and in Him all things
'
ly/ consist, it is very plain that the Son cannot be a work, but
8
p. 323, jje ig the Hand^ of God and the "Wisdom. This knowing.
"'
note a. .
but the Son they name not. For they say not, " Bless,
"Word, and praise, O Wisdom ;" to shew that all other things
are both praising and are works but the AVord is not a ;
work nor of those that praise, but is praised with the Father
and worshipped and confessed as God ^, being His Word and
Wisdom, and of the works the Framer.
24. This too the Spirit has declared in the Psalms with a
most apposite distinction, the Word of the Lord is true, and Ps. 33, 4.
says, Lord, how manifold are Thy works ! in Wisdom hast Ps. 104,
Thou made them all. But if the Word were a work, then ^' ^2
certainly He as others had been made in Wisdom nor would ;
k
BeoXoyovufvos. vid. snpr. p. 5G, note e. g. p. 42, d. 86, a. 9!), d. 122, c. 124,
k. also Incarn. c. Ar. 3. 19, d. tSerap. i. b. &c. Kvpio\oye7v, In lllud. Omn. (i, b.
28, a. 29, d. 31, d. contr. Sab. Grog, coiitr. Sab. Greg. §. 4, f.
Disc, one of those wlio groan, and would need one who shoiild
bring adoption and deliverance to Himself as well as others.
And if the whole creation groans
together, in behalf of
freedom from the bondage of corruption, whereas the Son is
not of those who groan nor of those who need freedom, but
He it is that gives sonship and freedom to all,
saying to the
'
"^o's Jews of His time \ The servant remains not in the house for
p. 386, ever, but the Son remaineth for ever ; if then the Son shall
^'^9Qo
mahe you free, ye shall be free indeed; it is clearer than the
note a.
light from these considerations, that the Word of God is not a
creature but true Son, and by nature genuine, of the Father.
'
35 36.
Concerning then The Lord hath created Me a beginning of
the ways, this is sufficient, as I think, though in few words,
to afford matter to the learned to frame more ample refutations
of the Arian heresy.
CHAPTER XXII.
" "
stones in building, previous existence. Before the world signifies
the divine intention and purpose. Recurrence to Prov. viii. 22. and
application of it to created Wisdom as seen in the works. The Son
reveals the Father, first by the works, then by the incarnation.
1. But
since the heretics, reading the following verse \ take '
aTixov
a perverse view of it as well as the preceding, because it is
written, He founded Me before the toorld, namely, that this Prov. 8,
7, 8.
nounced, {aTroSuKriKuis ovk anocpaf- In the beginning was the Word,' but I
riKwi;) therefore shew that Scripture hear it; I do not invent, but I read;
386 Had our Lord been mere man, the devil had not feared Him.
Disc, that Peter answered, saying, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the
'
j^j^^^ ^g Living God. This also the father of the Arian heresy asked
16. one of his first questions; // Thou he the Son of God; for
3
'
he knew that this is the truth and the sovereign principle^ of
1
Ep. our faith ;
and that, if He were Himself the Son, the tyranny
Sent. D. of the devil would have its end but if He were a creature,
;
3. c. infr
was one of those descended from that Adam whom he
jje too
o\). init.
67. fin. deceived, and he had no cause for anxiety. For the same
^
on 8.
I'^^son
iii.
the Jews of the day were angered, because the Lord
^ThKipiov said that He was Son of God, and that God was His
proper
'
p. 384,
Father. For had He called Himself one of the creatures, or
•• *• " I am a
said, work," they had not been startled at the
intelligence, nor thought such words blasj)hemy, knowing,
as they did, that Angels too had come among their fathers ;
supr.
their own father' the devil, to take some
special pains^ on this
"
p. 145,
note )•.
point
•• ;
'
and if He had said,' He founded Me
to be Word or
_
5
Trepiep- jjot to invcut for themselves what is not.
what we all read, but not all under- Euseb. Eccl.Tlieol. p. 177id- And Mace-
stand." Ambros. de Incarn. 14. Non donians, vid. Leont. de Sect. iv. init.
recipio cjuod extra Scripturam de tuo And Monophysiies, " I have not learned
infers. TertuU. Carn. Christ. 7- ^id- this from Scripture and I have a great
;
as the things built on it, that they may admit of being well Trin. iii.
'
^'
compacted together. Being then the Word, He has not, as
far as Woi^d ^ any such as Himself, who may be compacted
"^"^
^J^^^
with Him; for He is Only-begotten; but having become P- 291,
Epict.
enveloped in a body of earth." For so He is founded for r,. a.
through the likeness of the flesh, may attain unto a perfect p^^jjjo,
'•
man, and abide' immortal and incorruptible.
•"•
388 Our Lord urns founded, or created in flesh, ''before the icorld,"
.
been prepared even before we came into being, nay, before
the foundation of the world, and the reason why, is excellent
and wonderful. It beseemed not that God should counsel
concerning us afterwards, lest He should appear ignorant of
our fate. The God of all then, creating us by His proper
J ^
6 t5>v
Word, and knowing our destinies better than we, and fore-
Gen. 1,
seeing that, being made good, we should in the event be trans-
gressors of thecommandment, and be thrust out of paradise
for disobedience, being loving and kind, prepared before-
2
p. 251, hand in His proper Word, by whom also He created us ', the
note f.
purpose and grace, tchich was given us in Christ Jesus before the
world began, but is now made manifest by the appearing of our
Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and brought
Eph. 1, to light life. And to the Ephesians Blessed be God even the
~ '
;
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all
in Christ Jesus, according
spiritual blessing in heavenly places
as He hath chosen us in before Him
the foundation of the world,
that we should be holy and without blame before Him in
How He
by
us,
Jesus
,
beiore
p
Christ to Himself.
. .
unto adoption, but that the Sort Himself was founded before
the u'orld, taking on Him that economy which was for our
sake ? or how, as the Apostle goes on to say, have we an
inheritance being p)^'cdestinated, but that the Lord Himself ^-^i-
was founded before the icdrld, inasmuch as He had a purpose,
for our sakes, to take on Him through the flesh all that inhe-
ritance of judgment which lay against us, and we henceforth
were made sons in Him ? and how did we receive it before
the world was, when we were not yet in being, but afterwards
in time, but that in Christ was stored the grace which has
reached us ? Wherefore also in the Judgment, when every
one shall receive according to his conduct. He saj^s, Come, ye Matt. 25,
before the icorld was founded for this purpose that we, as
;
^ The Catliolic doctrine seems to be, we now bear, is not therefore invulne-
that Adam
innocent was mortal, yet rable, because it may be preserved from
would not in fact have died that he ;
wounding, so Adam's was not therefore
had no principle of eternal life within not mortal, because he was not bound
him, but was sustained continually by to die. Such a habit even of their
divine power, till such time as immor- present animal and mortal body I sup-
tality should have been given him. vid. pose was granted also to them who
Incarn. 4, a. b.
" If God accorded to the have been translated thence without
garments and shoes of the Israelites," death ; for Enoch and Elias too have
" that
says S. Augustine, they should through so long a time been preserved
not wear out during so many years, from the decay of age." de pecc. mer.
how is it strange that to man obedient i.'A. Adam's body, he says elsewhere,
" mortale
His power should be accorded, that, quia poterat mori, immortale
whereas his body was animal and mortal, quia poterat non mori;" and he goes
itwas so constituted as to become aged on to say that immortahty was given
without decay, and at such time as God him " de ligno vitce non de constitu-
willed might pass without the inter- tione naturae." Gen. ad lit. vi. 20. This
vention of death from mortality to ira- doctrine came into the controversy with
mortahty ? For as the flesh itself, which Baius, and Pope Pius V. condemned
390 And this was done beforehand, to be ready for the need.
as has been said, and before land was, and before the
mountains were settled, and before the fountains burst forth ;
that, though the earth and the mountains and the shapes of
visible nature pass away in the fulness of the present age,
we on the contrary may not grow old after their pattern, but
may be able to live after them, having the spiritual life and
blessing which before these things have been prepared for us
in the Word Himself according to election. For thus we
shall be capable of a life not temporary, but ever afterwards
"
2
p. 387, abide and live in Christ ; since even before this our life had
r. 6.
been founded and prepared in Christ Jesus.
§. 77. 8. Nor in any other way was it fitting that our life should
be founded, but in the Lord who is before the ages, and
through whom the ages were brought to be that, since it ;
everlasting life.
good^ it pleased God that His own Wisdom should con- vid.infr.
^
descend to the creatures, so as to introduce an impress and iv. 2.
*
Image on all in common and on each, that
'^
semblance of Its
^^P*"-
what was made might be manifestly wise works and worthy note q.
who was Himself the Son and Word. uxrinp vtt' eKTr\-i]^€uis Oav-
vTrfp<pva>s ical
"The Son and Word, the Framer of ixd^uf afacpetyyerai, e.g. Prov. 30, 3.
all, who was all- knowing and powerful
392 Wisdom in the works is a type and impress of the Son.
Disc,
through It we are able to know Its Father. For he who
:^^ hath the Son, saith He, hath the Father also ; and he that
receiveth Me, receiveth Him that sent Me. Such an impress
^John
Mat. 10, then of AVisdom being created in us, and
being in all the works,
^^-
with reason does the true and framing Wisdom take to Itself
what belongs to its own impress, and say, The Lord created Me
for His works ; for what the wisdom in us sa5's, that the Lord
Himself speaks as if it Avere His own and, whereas He is ;
^° ^'
in us and so called, is spoken of in this passage in the
Proverbs.
^ As Athan. here considers wisdom said to be framed, as the world is said,
as the image of the Creator in the Uni- and created the beginning of God's
is
phanius says,
'•
Scripture has no where
for He is the new man,
'
Christ Jesus ;
confirmed this passage, (Prov. 8, 22.)
in whom all we believers ought to be nor has any Apostle referred it to
clad and attired. For what was not Christ." (vid. also Basil, contr. Eunom.
new in man which was taken
the ii.
20.) He adds, "How
many wis-
on Him by our Saviour ? He rather doms of God are there, improperly so
who can imitate His conversation and called but One Wisdom is the Only-
!
bring out in himself all virtues, he has begotten, not improperly so called, but
put on the new man, and can say in truth. . . . The very word wisdom ' '
men are found in Scripture ? for a wise man feareth and de- \P°^' ^'
and the Preacher says, man's icisdom makeih his face toA og!^
' '
f-hine; and he blames those who are headstrong thus, /Sr/y ^''o^- l-^-
But if, as the Son of Sirach says. He p)oured her out upon 8, 1 ;
all His works ; she is icith all flesh according to His gift, EccIus.
and He
hath given her to them that love Him, and this out- l-^- 'f*-
^
pouring is a note, not of the Substance of the Yery Wisdom -avroao-
and Only-begotten, but of that wisdom which is imaged in
p.'lJyi^
the world, how is it incredible that the All-framing;
° and true ""•
?•
note on
Wisdom Itself, whose impress is the wisdom and knowledge Orat. iv.
heavens declare the glory of God, and the flrmament sheweth Ps. 19, 1.
His handyicork. This men have within them% they will ac-
if
knowledge the true Wisdom of God and will know that they ;
^
aremade really after God's image. And, as some son of a king, 3
^^rws,
when the father wished to build a city might cause his own ^,
^ote^k^^'
as for instance Angels do or men, but ferently, and very strikingly in contr.
'
2 D
394 As our Lordpersecuted in His Saints, so created in the icorhs.
Disc, name to be printed upon eacli of the works that were rising,
both to give security to them of the works remaining, by reason
of the show of his name on every thing, and also to make
' '
^ayra-
them remember him and his father from the name, and
having might be asked concerning it, how
finished the city
it was made, and then would answer, "It is made
securely, for
according to the will of my father, I am imaged in every work,
for there is a creation of my name in the works;" but saying
this, he does not signify that his own substance is created,
2 *
Tvirov Ijut the impress of himself by means of his name in the ;
all things.
§. 80. 13. Moreover, that the Son should be speaking of the im-
press that is within us as if itwere Himself, should not startle
any one, considering (for we must not care about repetition ^)
that, when Saul was persecuting the Church, in which was
His impress and image. He said, as if He were Himself under
Acts 9, 4. persecution, Saut, ivhy ^^^^'secutest thou Me ? Therefore, (as
has been said,) as, supposing the impress itself of Wisdom
which is in the works had said. The Lord hath created Me
would have been startled, so, if He, the
for the works, no one
True and Framing Wisdom, the Only-begotten Word of God,
should use what belongs to His image as about Himself,
namely. The Lord hath created Me for the works, let no one,
overlooking the wisdom created in the world and in the
works, think that Jle created is said of the Substance of the
*
Very Wisdom, diluting the wine with water % he be
^
avTO- lest,
aotpia^,
a defrauder of the truth. For It is Creator and Framer;
p. 393,
judged
r. 1. but Its impress is created in the works, as the copy of an
5 infr. iii
iii. 65. the world, but He is said, §. 43, 6 irapa- tously too, for it is quite a peculiarity
So^OTTOihs Kol Oavfj.aroTvoihs rov 0eoD of Athan. to repeat and to apologize for
K6yoi (pujTi^wv Kol ^cooTToiUv. kKacrrip
. .
doing so. The very same words occur
TT]U iSiav ivipynav aTroSiSoi/s, &c. 44. supr. 22, c. Orat. iii. 54, a. Serap. i. 19,
Shortly before he spoke of the Word as b. 27, e. Vid. also 2, c. 41, d. C7, a. 69,
the Principle of permanence. 41 fin. b. iii. 39 init. vid. especially lucarn. 20
S rh aiirh yap \iynv ovk OKvriTfov: d.
where Petavius, de Trin. ii. 1. §.8.
Wisdom "Beginning ofica}/s,"for by it ice ivalk heavenwards. 395
this way first, and keeping it in the fear of God, (as Solo-
man says, The fear of the Lord is the beginning of tcis-
' ' P'o^-
L
, T T . • • • 7- Sept.
dom,) then advancing upwards in his thoughts and perceiving
the Framing Wisdom which is in the creation, will perceive in
It also Its Father'', as the Lord Himself has said. He that John 14,
hath seen Me, hath seen the Father, and as John writes. He ^cho I'john
Before the ivorld hath He founded Me, since in its impress the Cyril in
^
works remain and eternal. Then, lest any, hearing
settled °^q^^^
before the earth, and before the icaters, and before all hills Prov. 8,
" ^'^^^b.
He Me, that in saying, before all creation," (for He
begets
includes all the creation under these heads,) He maj^ shew
that He is not created together with the works according to
Substance. For if He was created for the worhs, yet is be-
fore them, it follows that He is in being before He was created.
He is not then a creature by nature and substance, but as
•i
The whole of this passage might letterssignifying and heralding its
be illustrated at great length from the Lord and ;Maker by means of its order
contr. Gent, and the Incarn. V. D. vid. and harmony." Gent. 34. " As by look-
" The soul as in a we have an
supr. notes on 79. ing up to the heaven , . .
mirror contemjilates the Word the idea of the Word who set it in order,
so considering the Word of God, we
Image of the Father, and in Him con-
siders the Father, whose Image the cannot but see God His Father." 45.
Saviour is ... or if not ... yet from the And Incarn. 1 1, 41 , 42, &c. Vid. also
Basil, contr. Eunom. ii. Ifi.
things that are seen, the creation as by
2 n2
396 Wisdom first sheiccd Itself in the works, then in the human form.
§. 82. 17. Hence the whole earth is filled with the knowledofe of
Him ;
for the knowledge of Father through Son and of Son
i
Hereagain, as in former passages, the image of Wisdom on the works, or
theo-uYKoTaiSao-ishas noreferer!C.?what- what He above calls the Son's image,
ever to a figurative yivvr\ai.s, as Bishop on which account He is Kpun6ToKos.
Bull contends, but to His impressing
The Father and Son rejoice, in seeing Each Himself in Each Other. 397
from Father is one and the same, and the Father deliofhts
Chap.
XXII.
in Him, and same joy the Son rejoices in the Father,
in the
"
what is proper and like. When then was it, when the Father '^""'^"^
rejoiced not ? but if He ever rejoiced, He was ever, in whom
He rejoiced. And in whom does the Father rejoice, except
as seeing Himself in His proper Image, which is His Word ?
And though in sons of men also He had delight, on finishing
the world, as it is written in these same Proverbs, yet this vid. Prov.
01 ii
too has a consistent sense. For even thus He had delight, '
not as if joy came upon Him, but again as seeing the works
made after His own Image so that even this rejoicing of
;
Till
cupr.
Proverbs, as well as all that is above said, proves that the P- -^^•
'
note n.
Son
.
is not a creature m•
^ " The
ivi-KOfx-KiiffaTi. ancients cars using bad language towards by-
said iTOfj.Treveiy 'to use bad language,' standers, and their retorting it." Erasm.
and the coarse language of the pro- Adag. p. 1 158. He quotes Menander,
cession, Tro/xTret'o. This arose from the fVl rwu afxa^wv elal Tro/j-nuai Tivhs
custom of persons in the Bacchanalian (r(p65pa \oiSopot.
DISCOURSE III.
CHAPTER XXIII. •
Introduction. The doctiine of the coinherence. The Tather and the Son
Each whole and perfect God. They are in Each Other, because their
Substance is One and the Same. They are Each Perfect and have One
Substance, because the Second Person is the Son of the Fii'st. Asterius's
evasive explanation of the text under review refuted.
;
Since the Son
has all that the Father has, He is His Image and the Father is the
;
Jer. 3, 3.
having a ichore^s forehead, they refuse to he ashamed before
allmen in their irreligion. For whereas the passages which
they alleged. The Lord created lie \ and Made better than
'
supr.
2 c'n.
xiii.
^^'^ Angels ", and First-born ^, and Faithful to Him that made
3 ch. xxi. *
4 q\^^
J£i/)i have an orthodox meaning ^ and inculcate relio-iousness
xiv.
*
p. 341,
towards Christ, so it is that these men still, as if bedewed with
note 1.
^j^gserpent's poison, not seeing what they ought to see, nor
^
understanding what they read, as if in vomit from the depth
«
ipevyo-
'^^''°''
of their irreligious heart, have next proceeded to disparage our
John 14, Lord's words, I in the Father and the Father in Me ; saying,
" How can the One be contained in the Other and the Other
"
in the One ? or " How at all can the Father who is the greater
be contained in the Son who is the less?" or "What wonder, if
the Sou is in the Father, considering it is written even of us,
The Avians speak of God as material. 399
In Him ice live and more and have our heing^V^ And this Chap.
XXIII.
state of mind
is consistent with their
perverseness S who think Acts 17,
God be material ^ and understand not what is "True
to 28.
'
KaKOVoi<f
Father "and "True Son," nor "Light Invisible" and "Eternal," "
acifjLa
Father's Person by an ineffable union. locus of the Son, because when we con-
And hence the strong language of Pope template the Son in His fulness as u\os
"
Dionysius, supr. p. 46, the Holy Oeos, we do but view the Father as that
Ghost must repose and habitate in God," Person in whom God the Son is ; our
efj,(pi\ox^pi^i' TV ^^V '^"^ ivSiairaadai. mind abstracts His Substance which is
And hence the strong figure of S. Jerome, the Son for the moment from Him, and
(in which he is followed by S. Cyril, regards Him merely as Father. Thus
" Filius locus est Athan. rod \6yov
Thesaur. p. 51.) ttj^ Qiiavovaiav rji/ca/xe-
Patris, sicut et Pater locus est Filii." i/ov (pvffii T(jSlai/ToD Trarpi. In Illud.
in Ezek. iii. 12. Hence Athan. con- Omn. 4. It however, but an operation
is,
trasts the creatures who are eV ixe/xepiff- of the mind, and not a real emptying of
fiivois TOTTois and the Son. Serap. iii. 4. Godhead from the Father, if such words
c. d. Accordingly, one of the first may be used. Father and Son are both
symptoms of reviving orthodoxy in the the same God, though really and eter-
second school of semi Arians (as they neilly distinct from each other ; and Each
400 He is not in the Son, as He is in us.
-
/ueTou- participation^, but is the Father's proper Offspring'^. Nor
aig.
again is the Son in the Father, in the sense of the passage.
In Him we live and move and have our being ; for, He as being
'
e/C TTT)- from the Fount* of the Father is the Life, in which all
yrjs, ^
V- 25, things are both quickened and consist for the Life does not ;
note e.
live in life ^, else it would not be Life, but rather He
•' gives
^Qioyo- ®
velrai life to all things.
3. But now let us see what Asterius the Sophist says, the
§.2.
is full of the Other, that is, their Sub- '^
note e, p. 32, note
vid. supr. p. 15,
stance is one and the same. This is q. 203, and note d.
fin. p. On the
insisted on by S. Cyril,
" We must not other hand Eusebius considers the Son,
conceive that the Father is held in the like a creature, e'l auTrjs tyjs Trarpi/cf/s
Son as body in body, or vessel in vessel; [not ovaias, but] fjL^TOvaias, l/jawep airh
.... for the One is in the Other, dis eV TrriyTis, eir' avrhv irpoxeo/xevT^s irKrjpov-
TOLiTt^Trjri rrjs ovaias anapaWaKToj, Kal fiivov. Eccl. Theol. i. 2. words which
Trj Kara (pvaiv Iz/drrjTi re Kal dp.oi6TrjTi. are the more observable, the nearer they
in Joan. p. 28. And by S. Hilary; approach to the language of Athan. in
" Material natures do not admit of the text aud elsewhere. Vid iiifr. by
being
mutually in each other, of having a way of contrast, ou5e icaTO, fx^rovaiav
perfect unity of a nature which sub- avTov, aW' oKov tStov ahrov yevvriixa.. 4.
sists, of the abiding nativity of the Only-
<!
i.e. Son does not live by the gift
begotten being inseparable from the of life, for He is life, and does but
unity of the Father's Godhead. To give it, not receive. S. Hilary uses
God the Ouly-begotten alone is this different language with the same mean-
" Vita viventis
proper, aiul this faith attaches to the ing, [Filii] in vivo
mystery of a true nativity, and this is [Patre] est." de Trin. ii. 11. Other
the work of a spiritual power, that to modes of expression same mys- for the
be and to be in differ nothing to be in, " the whole
; tery are found infr. being
yet not to be one in another as body in of the Son is proper to the Father's
body, but so to be and to subsist, as to substance;" 3. "the Son's being, be-
be in the subsisting, and so to be in, as cause from the Father, is therefore in
also to subsist," &c. Trin. vii. fin. vid. the Father;" ibid, also 6 fin. "the
also iii. 23. The following quotation from Father's Godhead is the being of the
S. Anselm is made by Petavius, de Trin. Son." 5. Vid. supr. p. 145, note r. and
iv. IG fin. and may be given here, Didymus t] irazpiKri Qeorrfs, p. 82. and
though he cannot be here used as an S. Basil, e| oh ex^' '''^ ilvai. confr.
" Eunom. Just above Athan.
authority Though there be not many
;
ii. 12 fin.
eternities, yet if we say eternity in says that "the Son is the fulness of the
eternity, there is but one eternity. And Godhead." Thus the Father is the
so whatever is said of God's Essence, Son's life because the Son is from Him,
if repeated in itself, does not increase and the Son the Father's because the
quantity, nor admit number. Since Son is in Him. All these are but dif-
there is nothing out of God, when God ferent ways of signifying the inptx'^-
is born of God. He will not be born prifTts.
out of God, but remains in God."
Asterius said, the Father in the Son, for His words given Him. 401
ing is, as He says. His own, but the Father's, nor the works "
belong to Him, but to the Father who gave Him the power."
^ o'«"«
he ^
says, lawless man, that
the Power of the Father receives
that from this his irreligion it may follow to say that
power, *
in a Son the Son was made a son, and the Word received a
*
f" f"^'^
DUt ez' TCp
AVord's authority ; and, far from granting that He spoke this vi'S. £p.
proper to the Father, and knows that the Son's Being, because j
g Since the Father and the Son are is Spirit so is the Son, as the Father
the numerically One God, it is but ex- God so is the Son, as the Father
Light
pressing this in other words to say that so is the Son. From those things there-
the Father is in the Son and the Son in fore which are in the Father, are those
that Father, for all They have and all in which is the Son that is, of the
;
Father in the Son," because " the Son (unus," vid. however, the language
and the Father are one." And the of the Athan. Creed, which
expresses
cause of this unity and irepixt^pyia-ts is itself
differently after S. Austin) but
the Divine yevi'v<ns. Thus S. Hilary : Either in Other, because not Other
'*
The perfect Son of a perfect Father, in Either. The Father in the Son,
and of the Ingenerate God the Only- because from Him the Son the Only-. . .
begotten Offspring, who from Him who begotten in the Ingenerate, because
hath all hath received all, God from God, from the Ingenerate the Only-begotten,
Spirit from Spirit, Light from Light, cScc. Trin. ii. 4. vid.
supr. p. 326, note
says confidently,
'
The Father in Me g.
and I in the Father,' for as the Father
One and the same Godhead in Father and Son. 403
the thought, and in the stream the fountain for whoso thus :
^JjjJ'j
contemplates the Son, contemplates what is proper to the
Father's Substance, and knows that the Father is in the Son.
For whereas the Face ^ and Godhead of the Father is the
Being of the Son, it follows that the Son is in the Father
and the Father in the Son '.
^
and the unity of Substance. For they are one, not as one note r.'
4.
thing divided into two parts, and these nothing but one, nor §•
as one thing twice named, so that the Same becomes at one Orat.iv.
a
^ his image,) and
offspring is not unlike its parent, for it is
h
il^ovs, face or form. Petavius here 6€6t7]s tov vlov, 26. and 41. and supr. p.
prefers the reading Idiov Qeirrts and rh
; 145, note r. vid. also Damasc. F. O. i. 8.
XSiov occur together infr. 6. and 56. eI5os pp. 139, 140.
^ and so avofiows Kara
occurs Orat. i. 20, a. de Syn. 52. vid. avo/xotov ;
iravTa. Orat. 6. Kar' ovcriav. 17.
supr. p. 154, note e. infr. 6. 16. Ep. yEg.
i.
17, c. contr. Sabell. Greg. 8, c. 12, b. d. Orat. ii. 43. ttjs ovalas, infr. 14. vid.
vid. infr. p. 40(», note p, p. 424, note o. avoixoiSTT]?. infr. 8, c.
'
In accordance with note b. supr. ' " We must
conceive of necessity that
Thomassin observes that by the mutual in the Father the eternal, the ever-
is
coinherence or indwelling of the Three lasting, the immortal and in Him, not ;
C21. " He has in Him the Son and these are in the Son, and still the same
p.
is again in the Son, because of the are understood as in the Father. Thus
I and the Father are
'
Disc, the Son another God, for He was not procured ^ from without,
®^^® were there many, if a godhead be procured foreign from
^dnevo'e
p. 186, the Father's^; for if the Son be other, as an Offspring, still He
§6
is the Same as God and He and the Father are one in pro-
;
^ "
priety and peculiarity of nature, and the identity of the one
3 olKei6-
Mk'403 Grodhead, as has been said. For the radiance also is light,
r- 1- not second to the sun, nor a different light, nor from partici-
pation of it, but a whole and proper offspring of it. And
^
s
fj.€Tov-
criav
such an offspring is necessarily one light and no one would ;
6
say that they are two lights
doctrine but sun and radiance two, yet **,
Una Res ^ne the light from the sun enlightening in its radiance all
P- 145'
note r.
things.
° So also the Godhead of the Son is the Father's ^
,
; S
whence also it is indivisible and thus there is one God and ;
7
p. 149, none other but He. And so, since they are one, and the
8
parallel
Godhead itself one, the same things are said of the Son,
to de
which are said of the Father, except His being said to be
p. 149, Father ''
:
—
®, that He is God, And the Word was
for instance
John! 1
^'^^^' Almighty, Thus saith He which was and is and is to
Rev. I, 8. come, the Almighty; Lord, One Lord Jesus Christ; that He
John 8,'
is Light, / am the Light ; that He forgives sins, that ye may
!-•
know, He says, that the Son of man hath power u2)on earth
'
24. to forgive sins ; and so with other attributes. For ail things
15 ^^y^ ^^® ^^^ Himself, whatsoever the Father hath, are Mine ;
17 10
§. 5.
and again. And Mine are Thine. And on hearing the attri-
®
9
Ta Tov butes of the Father spoken of Son, we shall thereby see the
'^«'rp *
Father in the Son ;
and we shall contemplate the Son in the j
and those in the Son, but the things thereby is rightly understood
'
He
which are in the Father those are in that hath seen Me, hath seen the
"
the Son, and what thou seest in the Father.' Scrap, ii. 2.
understands that the Son and the Father are one, knows that
He is in the Father and the Father in the Son ;
for the God-
head of the Son is the Father's, andj^is in the Son ;
and?
whoso enters into this, is convinced that He that hath seen
the Son, hath seen the Father ; for in the Son is contemplated
the Father's Godhead. And we may
perceive this at once
from the illustration of the Emperor's image. For in the
image is the face and form of the Emperor, and in the
person who looks at the image, sees in it the Emperor and ; p. lofi,'
^°^^
he again who sees the Emperor, recognises that it is he
who is in the image". And from the likeness not differing,
to one who after the image wished to view the Emperor, the
"
image might say, I and the Emperor are one for I am in ;
beholdest in him, and what thou hast seen in him, that thou
beholdest in me °." Accordingly he who worships the image,
™
Here these three texts, which so Chrysostom's second persecution arose
often occur together, are recognised as from his interfering with a statue of the
"three;" so are they by Eusebius Empress which was so near the Church,
Eccl. Theol. iii. 19. and he says that that the acclamations of the people be-
Marcellus and "those who Sabellianize fore it disturbed the services. Socr. vi.
with him," among whom he included 18. The Seventh Council speaks of
Catholics, were in the practice of ad- the images sent by the Emperors into
ducing them, OpvWovvTfs; which bears provinces instead of their coming in
incidental testimony to the fact that person Ducange in v. Lauratum. Vid.
;
the doctrine of the iripix^p'Offi-s was the a description of the imperial statues and
great criterion between orthodox and their honours in Gothofred, Cod. Theod.
Arian. Many instances of the joint t. 5,
pp. 346, 7. and in Philostorg. p. 90.
use of the three are given supr. p. 22!i, vid. also Molanus de Imaginibua ed.
note g. to which may be added Orat. ii. Paquot, p. 197.
54 " Athanasius
init. iii. 16
G7 fin. iv. 17, a.
fin. guards against what is
Serap. ii. 9, c. Serm. Maj. de fid. 29. defective in this illustration in the next
Cyril. deTrin. p. 554. in Joann. p. 168. chapter, but independent of such ex-
Origen Periarch. p. 66. Hil. Trin. ix. 1. planation a mistake as to his meaning
Ambros. Hexaem. 6. August, de Cons, would be impossible; and the passage
Ev. i. 7. affords a good instance of the imperfect
n vid. Basil. Hom. contr. Sab. p. and partial character of all illustrations
192. The honour paid to the Imperial of the Divine Mystery. What it is
" He who
Statues is well known. taken to symbolize is the unity of the
crowns the Statue of the Emperor, of Father and Son, for the Image is not
course honours him, whose image he a Second Emperor but the same. vid.
has crowned." Ambros. in Psalm 1 18, Sabcll. Greg. 6. But no one, who bowed
X. 25. Chrysost. Hom. on
vid. also before the Emperor's
Statue can be
Statues, O. T. pp. 356, &c fragm. in supposed to have really worshipped
Act. Cone. vii. (t. 4, p. 89. Hard.) it; whereas our Lord is the Object
406 The Being of Son the Godhead, andffo?n the Substance, of Father
'
Disc.
III.
in worships the Emperor also for the image is his form
it ;
and face. Since then the Son too is the Father's Image, it\
must necessarily be understood that the Godhead and pro- /
6.
and the Father in Me. Nor is this Form of the Godhead
§.
piTOV
and beholds that what is said of the Father is also said of the
^
7
e7ri7e- Son, not as accruing to His Substance by grace or partici-
vo/xiva
of the Son is the proper
^
fjLiTO- pation *, but because the very Being
Offspring of the Father's Substance, will fitly understand
the
John words, as I said before, I in the Father, and the Father in Me ;
14, 10;
10, 30.
and / and the Father are One. For the Son is such as the \ %
Father is, because He has all that is the Father's.
paid to Nebuchadnezzar's statue, vid. for the Divine Works. Orat. 2f{, 3.
Hieron. in Dan. 3, 18. Incense was
One faith and iconsh/'p towards Father and Son. 407
cordingly when the Father is called the only God, and we g^' 3 j^
read that there is one God, and / am, and beside Me there is Deut. 32,
no God, and / the first and I am the last, this has a fit mean- is.' 44, e".
ing. For God is One and Only and First but this is not ;
^
said to the denial of the Son perish the thought for He is p. 33,
2
; ;
in that One, and First and Only, as being of that One and"°^'"
Only and First the Only Word and Wisdom and Radiance.
And He too is the First, as the Fulness of the Godhead of
the First and Only, being whole and full God ^ This then
q vid. supr. pp. 55, 228. This is in Spirit is full of the Son, not being part
opposition to the Arians,
who said that of another, but whole in Himself; ....
the title Father implied priority of ex- Let us understand that the Face (dSos)
istence. Athan. says that the title is One of Three truly subsisting, be-
" Maker " does, but that the title
ginning in Father, beaming in Son, and
" father " does not. vid. su]ir. p. C5, manifested through Spirit." Pseudo-
note m. p. 98, note n. p. 223, note g. Ath. c. Sab. Greg. 5 —
12. " I
hardly
arrive at contemplating the One, when
p. 338, note d.
r Athan. de Incarn. c. Ar. 19, c. I am encircled with the radiance of the
vid. Ambros. de fid. iii. cap. 12, 13. Three; I hardly arrive at distinguish-
Naz. Orat. 23, 8. Basil, de Sp. S. n. 04. ing the Three, when I am carried back
s vid. supr. 1, note b. ii. 41 fin. also to the One. When I have imaged to
infr. iv. I. "You have the Son, you myself One of the Three, I think It
have the Father ;
fear not duality .... the whole, and my sight is filled, and
There is One God, because Father is what is more escapes me .... And when
One, and Son is God, having identity I embrace the Three in my contempla-
as Son towards Father .... The Father tion, I see but One Luminary, being
is the whole fulness of Godhead as unable to distinguish or to measure the
Father, and the Son is the whole fulness Light which becomes One." Naz.
" Thou
of Godhead as Son .... The Father has Orat. 40, 41. art That which
Being perfect and without defect, being begetteth and That which is begotten
root and fount of the Son and the Spirit; .... for Thou wast poured forth, O in-
and the Son is in the fulness of God- cftably bearing, to bear a Son, glorious
head, a Living Word and Offspring of Wisdom, Framer of all and though
;
the Father without defect. And the poured forth Thou remainest, arojuoio-i
408 The Father the only Ood, because the Word is in Him.
Disc, fg j^ot said on His account, but to deny that there is other
such as the Father and His Word.
TOfxals fxatevofievos &c. Synes. Hymn, alone, as in Father and Son together
" The fulness of God-
iii. pp. 328, 9. .... For the Father did not lessen Him.
head is in the Father, and the fulness have a Son for Himself, but so
self to
of Godhead is in the Son, but not dif- begat of Himself another self, as to
fering, but one Godhead .... If of all remain whole in Himself, and to be in
believers there was one soul and one the Son as great as He is by Himself.
heart .... if every one who cleaves to And so the Holy Ghost, whole from
the Lord is one spirit, .... if man and whole, doth not precede That wherein
wife are one flesh, if all of us men in He proceeds, but is so great with Him
respect of nature are of one substance, as He is from Him, and neither lessens
if Scripture thus speaks of human things, Him by proceeding nor increases by
that many are one, of which there can adhering .... Moreover, He who hath
be no comparison with things divine, given to so many hearts of His faithful
how much more are Father and Son to be one heart, how much more doth
One in Godhead, where there is no dif- He maintain in Himself that these
ference of substance or of will, &c." Three and Each of Them should be
Ambros. de Fid. i. n. 18. " This
God, and yet all together, not three
Trinity is of one and the same nature gods, but One God?" August. Ep.
and substance, not less in Each than 170, 5. vid. p. 334, note y. and infr.
in All, nor greater in All than in Each ; note on 36 fin.
but so great in Father alone or in Son
CHAPTER XXIV.
TEXTS EXPLAINED ; EIGHTHLY, JOHN Xvii. 3. AND THE LIKE.
Our Lord's divinity cannot interfere with His Father's prerogatives, as the
"
One God, which were so earnestly upheld by the Son. " One is used
in contrast to false gods and idols, not to the Son, through whom the
Father spoke. Our Lord adds His Name to the Father's, as included
in Him. The Father the First, not as if the Son were not First too,
but as Origin.
't)^
manifest to all ;
but since the irreligious men, alleging such
passages also, dishonour the Lord and reproach us, saying,
" Behold God is said to be One and Only and First how say ;
all may know from this also that the Arians are really con-
wards the Father, then be such words uttered against Him ; J°'^.g 5^
heaven, not to do 3Ig oicn icill, hut the idll of Him that '68; 14,
" '
sent 3fe ; and teaching the disciples, 31// Father is greater
2 E
410 " One not the Son.
Only GocV^ excludes idols,
5, 23. the difficulty ', that one must need take such a view of such
? and on the other hand, if the Son is the Father's
r^T'iJa"' passages
xa&ri,
"VVord, who is so wild, besides these Christ-opposers, as to think
note that God has thus spoken, as traducing and denying His own
Word ? This is not the mind of Christians perish the thought
; ;
for not with reference to the Son is it thus written, but for the
denial of those falsely called gods, invented by men.
2. And this account of the meaning of such passages is
God, and There is none other besides Me, viz. that He may
make men renounce falsely called gods, and that they may
recognise Him the true God instead.
3. Indeed when God said this. He it
through His
said
^
3 ot
vvv, own Word, unless forsooth these modernJews add this too,
00,^
P"
that He has not said this through His Word but so hath;
note a. He
spoken, though they rave,
these followers of the devil ^.
a Sia^oXiKoi. vid. supr. p. 9, note s. soon after he says that his accuser was
vid. also Orat.ii. 38, a. 73, a. 7-4 i"it- t^v Sia^oXov rporrov avaXa^^v, where
bef .re the word has no article, and Sia^d^K-rjfiai
Ep. J5g. 4 and G. In the passage
us there seems an allusion to false ac- and SiffiXTtO-nv have preceded, vid. also
cusation or lying, which is the proper Hist. Ar. 52 fin. And so in Sent. D. his
meaning of the word SiaiSdAXa'i'
;
occurs speaking of the Arians' "father the
shortly before. And so in Apol. ad devil," 3, c. is explained 4, b. by tovs
Const, when he calls Magnentius Sta- irarepas Sia^aXXSvrcov and rris els rhv
^oXos, it is as being a traitor, ?• and
iiriffKoiroy Sia^oXris. vid. also 27 fin.
Whose Name added to " One to sheic that included. 411
God," it is
or does, but He says and does it in the Word. Not then Chap.
•'
XXIV.
with reference to Him is this said, Christ's enemies, but to
to Him and not from Him.
^
....
words, he would have been settin": rio^ht the error and have \-
so spoken, not as having his radiance without him, but in 26.
}•
^"'^
John 15, . .
the radiance shewing: his own light. Therefore not for the
denial of the Son, nor with reference to Him, are such
passages, but to the overthrow of falsehood. Accordingly
God spoke not such words to Adam at the beginning, though
His Word was with Him, by whom all things came to be ;
arose of such words, for the denial of gods that were not. infr. p.
Nay I would add, that they were said even in anticipation '^^^^ ^
of the folly of these Christ-opposers ^, that they might know,
that whatsoever god they devise external to the Father's
Substance, he is not True God, nor Image and Son of the
there between the True and the not true ?) but now by adding
Himself to the Father, He has shewn that He is of the
Father's nature ;
and He has given us to know that of the
True Father He isTrue Offspring. And John too, as he had ^
^laQiov
a7-e in the True, even in His Son Jesus Christ; This is tJie ?• ^'-^i
alone, and when God I only stretch out the heavens, it is 5, 20.
says,
'
the Word of the Only, in whom all things were made, and John 1,
'>
who worsliip one whom they them- note d. )). liOl, note c. ]>. IJIO, note h.
selves call a creature, vid. supr. p. 1J)1, infr. p. 423, notes m and n.
2 E 2
412 ^s theFather is First yet Only, so the Son First-born yet Only,
Disc. without whom was made not one thing. Therefore, if they
III.
were made through the Word, and yet He says, I Only, and
together with that Only is understood the Son, through
whom
the heavens were made, so also then, if it be said. One God,
and I Only, and I the First, in that One and Only and First
ffWWV is understood the Word coexisting ^ as in the Light the
I
Radiance.
5. And this can be understood of no other than the Word
alone. For all other things subsisted out of nothing through
the Son, and are greatly different in nature but the Son Him- ;
self is natural and true Offspring from the Father and thus ;
not from any, nor any before Him, but that He is Origin
and Cause of all things, and to destroy the Gentile fables,
that He has said / the First, it is plain also, that when
the Son is called First-born, this is done not for the sake of
ranking Him
with the creation, but to prove the framing and 1
'^
^
^
vid. p
adoption of all things through the Son. For as the Father
368,
note g. is First, so also is He both First ^, as Image of the First, and
c He " I the first " the One God in three ways. It is the doc-
says that in
come in, else trine of the Fathers, that, though we
question of time does not
creatures would come second to the use words expressive of a Trinity, yet
Creation, as if His and their duration that God is beyond number, and that
" First"
admitted of a common measure. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, though
then does not imply succession, hut is eternally distinct from each other, can
equivalent to apxv
a word which, as
l scarcely be viewed together in common,
" Father," does not imply that the Son except as 0?ie substance, as if they could
is not from eternity. not be generalized into Three Any what-
d It is no inconsistency to say that ever and as if it were, strictly speak-
;
the Father is first, and the Son first ing, incorrect to speak of a Person, or
also, for comparison or number does otherwise than of /he Person, whether
not enter into this mystery. Since Each of Father, or of Son, or of Spirit. The
is SAos 6fhs, Each, as contemplated by question has. almost been admitted by
our finite reason, at the moment of con- S. Austin, whether it is not possible to
templation excludes the Other. Though say that God is One Person, (Trin.
we say Three Persons, Person hardly vii.
8.) for He is wholly and en-
denotes one abstract idea, certainly not tirely Father, and at the same time
as containing under it three individual wholly and entirely Son, and wholly
subjects, but it is a term applied
to the and entirely Holy Ghost. Some pas-
in ivlioni the ivhole creation are made sons. 413
because the First is in Him, and also Offspring from the Chap.
into sonship.
sages from the Fathers shall be given entirely, and the Son the One God
on that subject, infr. 36 fin. vid. also sujir. singly and entirely, (vid. supr. p. 334,
p. 407, note s. Meanwhile the doctrine note y.) the Word not a sound, which
;
here stated will account for such ex- is nothing, nor a quality which is un-
" God from
pressions as God," i. e. the worthy of God, but a substantial Word
One God (who is the 8on) from the One and a substantial Wisdom. "As," he
God (who is the Father) vid. supr. p.
; continues, "the Origin is One substance,
155, note f. Again, rj ovcria aurrj rfjs so Its Word and Wisdom is One, sub-
oxxTLOLS rrjs TrarpiKris iarl yeyfri/xa. de stantial and subt'istent for as from God
;
being a something in It,) whereas the substantial and substantive, and from
Catholic doctrine preserves unity because existing existing," &c.
the Father is the One God simply and
CHAPTER XXV.
TEXTS explained; ninthly, JOHN X. 30; xvii. 11, &c.
Arian explanation, that the Son is one with the Father in will and judg-
ment but so are all good men, nay things inanimate contrast of the
; ;
Arians in fact hold two Gods, and tend to Gentile polytheism. Arian
explanation that the Father and Son are one, as we are one with Christ,
is put aside by the Regula Fidei, and she^Ti invalid by the usage of
Scripture in illustrations the true force of the comparison force of
; ;
the teiTus used. Force of " in us ;" force of " as ;" confii-med by S. John.
"
In what sense we are " in God and His " sons."
dared to write as well as say this '. Now what can be more
1
Aste-
rius, p.
401 init.
a uis aliToi BiXovffi. vid. the Arian has been touched on
p. 411, r. 2. a-vfj-fpaiuia
and infr. p. 425, r. 2 "not as you say, supr. p. 107, note t. p. 155, note g.
but as we will." This is a common phrase Besides Origen, Is'^ovatian, the Creed
with Athan. vid. supr. p. 92, note r. and of Lucian, and (if so) S. Hilary, as
especially Hist. Tract. O. T. p. 260, note mentioned in the former of these notes,
" one " is
d. (vid. also Sent. Dion. 4, b. 14, b.) explained as oneness of will by
It is here contrasted to the Church's S. Hippolytus, contr. Noet. 7, wliere he
doctrine, and connected with the word explains John 10, 30. by 17, 22. like
iSios, for which supr. p. T8, note n. the Arians and, as might be expected,
;
p. 233, note a. Vid. also de Mort. Ar. by Eusebius Eccl. Theol. iii. p. 193.
fin. Also contr. Apoll. ii. 5 init. in con- and by Asterius ap. Euseb. contr. Marc.
trastwith the evayyeXiKhs opos, Apol. pp. 28, 37- The passages of the Fathers
contr. Ar. 36, d. Vid. also 2, f. de fug. in which this text is adduced are col-
2, a. lected by Maldonat. in loc.
^
(Tvfj.(pwvos.\\i. infr. 23. supr. p. 148.
Ifthe Son Oneicith God but imcill, every ohectt. creature the Son Alb
the Father, it follows forthwith'^ that the Angels'^ too, and the
other beings above us, Powers and Authorities, and Thrones
and Dominions, and what we Sun and Moon, and the see.
said of them too, that they and the Father are one, and that
each is God's Image and Word. For what God wills, that
will they; and neither in judging nor in doctrine are they
had the audacity to say, I and the Father are One, or, /John
them
in tJie Father, and the Father in Me; but
...
it is said of all of
30
t. r.
; My
14,
lo,
Him on the contrary that He only is Image true and natural '
'
of the Father. ° we were made after the Image',
For thouorh " -'SSS;
de Trm.
and called both image and glory of God, yet not on our o^\^l vii. fin.
account still, but for that Image and true Glory of God in-
habiting us, which is His Word, who was for us afterwards
made flesh, have we this grace of our designation.
<^
wpa. vid. p. 130, note c. also Orat. Thesaur. p. 255 fin.
ii.6, b. iv. 19, c. d. Euseb. contr. Marc.
''
This argument is found above,
p. 47, b. p. yi, b. Cyril. Dial. p. 450'. p. 148. vid. also Cyril. dcTrin. i.
p. 40?.
416 Where the Son works, there the Father worhs in the Son.
utterly different from the Father Y for Paul taught like the
Saviour, yet was not like Him in svibstance ^.
' Kar
ohaiav
Having then
^
&/j.oio^,
such notions, they speak falsely whereas the Son and the ;
p. 210, Father are one in such wise as has been said, and in such
note e.
wise is the Son like the Father Himself and from Him, as we
Tat
may see and understand son
be towards father, and asto we
may see the radiance towards the sun.
Such then being the Son, therefore when the Son works,
4.
*
p. 406. the Father is the "Worker*, and the Son
coming to the Saints,
the Father is He who cometh in the Son^, as He has promised
^ o /xiv TraT^p, irarrip icrri. And referring us back to the Origin of all
" In the Godhead and True Cause of beings, says, ' Call
so, only, o naTypKvpiws
((TtI TraTrip, Kal 6 vihs Kvpicos vi6s." no one your father upon earth, for One
"
Serap. i. 16. vid. the whole passage. is your Father, which is in heaven.'
He speaks of " receding from things He adds, that if He is proj)erIy and not
generate, casting away human images, metaphorically even our Father, (vid.
and ascending to the Father." supr. p. 56, note k.) much more is He the
" not
p. 153. and of men being in nature Kara (pvaii/ vlov. Vid. also
7ro,T7]p Toil
and truth benefactors," Almighty God Euseb. contr. Marc. p. 22, c. Eccl.
being Himself the type and pattern. Theol. i. 12. fin. ii. 6. Marcellus, on
infr. pp. 427, 8. and note r. Vid. pp. the other hand, said that our Lord was
211, 214, 215. and p. 18, note o. p. 211, Kvptws Xoyos, not Kvpiws vi6s. ibid. ii.
note f. p. 212, note g. And so S. Cyril, 10 fin. vid. supr. p. 307, note d.
Th Kvpicos r'lKTOv i^ eavrov rh de76u *
And so ipya^ofx^phv rov irarphs,
itTTip, rijxils 5e Kara ^dpi.'i)cnv Thesaur. ipyd^eadai Kal rhf m6v. In illud Omn.
p. 133. narrip Kvpiws, oti jUtj Kal vi6s. I d.
,
Cum luce nobis prodeat, In Patre
wavep Ka\ vlhs Kvpiws, otl fir] Koi -rrarrip. totus Filius, et totus in Verbo Pater.
Naz. Orat. 29, 5. vid. also 23, « fin. 25, Hymn. Brev. in fer. 2. Ath. argues
K). vid. also the whole of Basil, adv. from this oneness of operation the one-
Eun. "One must not say," he
ii. 23. ness of substance. And thus S. Chry-
" that these names sostom on the text under review argues
observes, properly
and primarily, Kvpioos Kal irpwrcos belong that if the Father and Son are one
to men, and are given by us but by a Kara T^f dvvafiiv. They are one also in
figure KaTaxpvcriKais (p 335, note a.) Joan. Horn. 61, 2, d.
ovtria. in Tertul-
to God. For our Lord Jesus Christ, lian in Prax. 22. and S. Epiphanius,
The Father and the Son One Source of grace. 417
wlien He says, / and My Father will come, and tcill make ^"^^
Our abode with him; for in the Image is contemplated the j—j^---
Father, and in the Radiance is the Light. Therefore, as we 23.
said just now, when the Father gives grace and peace,
the Son also gives it, as Paul signifies in every Epistle,
writing, Grace to you and peace from God our Father and
the Lord Jesus Christ. For one and the same grace is from
the Father in the Son, as the light of the sun and of the
radiance and the sun's illumination is effected through
is one,
the radiance and so too when he prays for the Thessalonians,
;
in saying, Now God Himself even our Father, and the Lord i Thess.
Jesus Christ, may He direct our tcay unto you, he has guarded
'
the unity of the Father and of the Son. For he has not said,
"
May they direct," as if a double grace were given from
two Sources, This and That, but 3Iay He direct, to shew
that the Father gives it through the Sou at which these ;
—
irreligious ones will not blush, though they
well might. For ^. 12.
is, such a mode of giving shews the oneness of the Father and
the Son. No one, for instance, would pray to receive from
God and the Angels °, or from any other creature, nor would
Hser. 57. p. 488. seem to say the same where insists on his teaching concerning
on the same text. vid. Larape in loc. Cnrist, 'through the bloodoftheCross,'"
And so fS.Atlian. rpias adialperos rfj &c. And Theodoret on Col. 3, 17- says,
"
(pvffft, Ka\ ravTTis rj ifepyeia. Scrap.
/ui'a Following this rule, the Synod of
i. 28, f. ec de\T]ua Trarphs Kal viov Kal Laodicea, with a view to cure this an-
Pov\T}fxa, iirel Kal t] (pvcris jx'w.. In illud cient disorder, passed a decree against
Omn. 5. Various passages ot the Fathers the praying to Angels, and leaving our
to the same effect, (e. g. of S. Ambrose, Lord Jesus Christ." "All suppHca-
si unius voluntatis et operationis, unius tion, prayer, intercession, and thanks-
est essentise, de Sp. ii. 12 fin. and of giving is to be addressed to the Su-
fjiia ivepyeia, rovTwv preme God, through the High Priest
S. Basil, S>v Kal
ovffia of Greg. Nyss. and Cyril
fiia,
who is above all Angels, the Living
Alex.) are brought together in the "Word and God .... But Angels we may
Lateran Council. Concil. Hard. t. 3, not fitly call upon, since we have not
p. 851), &c. The subject is treated at obtained a knowledge of them which
is above men." Origen contr. Cels. v.
length by Petavius Trin. iv. 15.
S Vid. Basil de Sp. S. c. 13. "There 4, 5. vid. also for similar statements
were men," Clirysostom on
says S. Voss. de Idololatr. i. 0. These ex-
Col. 2. "who said. ought not to We tracts are made inof the
illustration
have access to God through Christ, but particularpassage to which they are
through Angels, for the former is beyond appended, not as if they contain the
our power. Hence the Apostle every whole doctrine of Origen, Theodoret,
418 Angels not associated icit/i God in Scripti(re, but the Son.
"
Dis^c.
any one say, God and the Angel may He give thee ;" but
from Father and the Son, because of Their oneness and
> ^
efoeiSv the oneness of Their giving. For through the Son is given
vid. p. what is given and there is nothing but the Father operates
;
144, r. 2.
jt;
through the Son for thus is grace secure to him who
;
receives it.
but these are not his doings, but of God who commanded
and sent him, whose also it is to deliver, whom He will
deliver. Therefore it was no other than the Lord God
Gen. 28, Himself whom he had seen, who said to him, And behold I
15. Sept.
^^j^^ ^^.^Y/i fj^g^^ f^ guard thee in all the ivay whither thou
yoest; and it was no other than God whom he had seen, ^"^f-
who kept Laban from his treachery, ordering him not to
speak evil words to Jacob and none other than God did
;
^^ ' '
thee and increase thee and multiply thee, and thou shall be for
Disc.
III.
light enlightens, that the radiance irradiates and what the ;
for when the Father works, it is not that any Angel works,
'
TTOITJTI- or any other creature for none of these is an efficient cause ^,
;
Khv alriov
p. 310,
but they are of things which come to be and moreover ;
note h.
being separate and divided from the only God, and other in
nature, and being works, they can neither work what God
works, nor, as I said before, when God
gives grace, can they
give grace with Him. Nor, on seeing an Angel would a
man say that he had seen the Father for Angels, as it is ;
Heb, 1 ,
written, are ministering spirits sent forth to minister, and
14.
are heralds of gifts given by Him through the Word to those
who receive them. And the Angel on his appearance,
2 Sco'ttJ-
himself confesses that he has been sent by his Lord ^, as
TOU
Gabriel confessed in the case of Zacharias, and also in
the case of Mary, Mother of God '. And he who beholds a
i
T^s BeoroKov Mapias. vid. also infr. Lup. Ephes. Ep. 94. He adds that it,
29, 33. Orat. iv. 32. Incarn. c. Ar. 8, as well as at/dpanrordKos, was used by
22. supr. p. 244, note 1. As to the " the
great doctors of the Church."
history of this title, Tlieodoret, who Socrates Hist. vii. 32. says that Origen,
from his party would rather be disin- in the first tome of his Comment on the
clined towards it, says that " ike most Romans, (vid. de la Rue in Rom. lib. i.
ancietit {iSii' ird\ai Kal TrpiiraXai) he- 6. the original is lost,) treated largely
ralds of the orthodox faith taught to of the word which implies that it
;
name and believe the Mother of the was already in use. "
Interpreting,"
Lord d(:OT6Kov, according to the Aposlo- he says, ''how OeorSKos is used, he dis-
lical tradition." Hser. iv. 12. And cussed the question at length." Con-
John of Antioch, whose championship stantine implies the same in a passage
of Nestorius and quarrel with S. Cyril which divines, e.- g. Pearson (On the
are well known writes to the former. Creed, notes on Art. 3.) have not dwelt
" This title no ecclesiastical teacher
upon, (or rather have apparently over-
has put aside those who have used it
; looked, in arguing from Ephrem ap.
are many and eminent, and those who Phot. Cod. 228, p. 776. that the literal
have not used it have not attacked those " Mother of God "
phrase originated in
who used it." Concil. Eph. part i. c. S. Leo,) in which, in pagan
language
25. (Labb.) And Alexander, the most indeed and with a painful allusion, as it
obstinate or rather furious of all Nes- would seem, to heathen mythology, he
torius's adherents, who died in banish-
" When He had to draw near
says, to a
ment in Egypt, fully allows the ancient body of this world, and to tarry on earth,
reception of the word, though only into the need so requiring. He contrived a
popular use, from which came what he sort of irregular birth of Himself, vSBt^v
considersthe doctrinal corruption. "That Tivh.yiveaiv ; for without marriage was
in festive solemnities, or in preaching there conception, and childbirth, eiAei-
and teaching, BeoTSKos should be un- Qvia, of a pure Virgin, and a maid the
guardedly said by the orthodox without Mother of God, Qsov /x'iJTr/p Koprj." ad
explanation, is no blame, because such Sanct. Coet. p. 480. The idea must
statements were not dogmatic, nor said have been familiar to Christians before it
with evil meaning. But now after the could thus be paralleled or represented,
corruption of the whole world, &c." vid. notes on 29, 33 infr.
Appearances ofth e Son in Scripture distinctfrom those ofAngels A2 1
seen in a flame of fire out of the hush, and the Lord called
Moses out of the hush, saying, L am the God of thy father,
the God Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of
of
Jacob, yet was not the Angel the God of Abraham, but in
the Angel God spoke. And what was seen was an Angel ;
AjkI he who hath seen the Son, knows that, in seeing Him,
he has seen, not Angel, nor one merely greater than Angels,
nor in short any creature, but the Father Himself. And he
who hears the "Word, knows that he hears the Father as he ;
Disc. and radiance. And one is the liglit from the sun in the ra-
III.
diance and so we know of but one origin and the All-framing
; ;
notes m
and n. proper to the Father's Substance, they will introduce many
^
A
' c
fT€pO-
because of their difference of kind (unless forsooth they ;
and must serve two Lords \ one Ingenerate, and the other '
Kvpiof;,
the True God, and the other in one who is made and fashioned
by themselves and called God. And it follows of necessity,
in so great blindness, that, when they worship the Ingene-
rate, they renounce the generate, and when they come to the
creature, they turn from the Creator. For they cannot see
the One in the Other, because their natures and operations
are foreign and distinct^. And
with such sentiments, they ^
p- 416,
they not rank themselves with the Gentiles ? for they too, as
these, worship the creature more than God the Creator of
all °; and though they shrink from the Gentile name, in order
^ *
to deceive the unskilful, yet they secretly hold a like senti- y-^oKpl-
urge,
" We
say not two Ingenerates %" they plainly say to
'
p- 224,
deceive the simple^; for in their very professing say "We e^^ „^j^^
not two Ingenerates," they imply two Gods, and these with
different natures, one generate and one Ingenerate. And
though the Greeks worship one Ingenerate and many generate,
but these one Ingenerate and one generate, this is no differ-
ence from them for the God whom they call generate is
;
one out of many, and again the many gods of the Greeks
have the same nature with this one, for both he and they
are creatures. Wretched are they and the more for that
™vid. p. 118, note m. p. 63, note g. ternal to God's nature, is cerfainly ge-
p. 150, note y. The Ai-ians were in nerate ;
and whatever is clear of the
the dilemma of holding two gods or wor- definition of creation, is cerfainly witliin
shijipiug the creature, unless they de- the definition of the Godhead." lu
nied to our Lord both divinity and wor- Joan. p. 52. vid. also Naz. Orat. 31, G.
ship. On the consequent attempt, Basil, contr. Eunom. ii. 31.
" vid.
especially of the Semi-Arians, to con- supr. p. 3lH, note c. Petavius
sider Our Lord neither as God nor a gives a large collection of passages, de
creature, vid. p. 10, note n. p. 224, Trin. ii. 12. §. 5. from tlie Fathers in
note a. But "every substance," says jjroof of the worsliip of Our Lord evi-
" which is not God, is a On the Arians
S. Austin, deiicing His Godhead.
creature, and which is not a creature, as idolaters vid. supr. p. 191, note d.
is God." de Trin. i. (!. And so S. also Ep. yEg. 4, 13. and Adelph. 3 init.
Cyril, "We see creation and
Gjd and Scrap, i. 29, d. Theodor. in Rom. 1,25.
besides nothing; for whatever falls ex-
424 Ariansdeny Christas Jews,achioivledge manygodsas Gentiles.
Disc,
blasphemy against Christ for they have fallen
their fault is ;
from the truth, and are greater traitors than the Jews in
' '
ffvyKv-
denying the Christ, and they wallow with the Gentiles,
*"
vid. Orat. hateful as they are to (rod, worshipping the creature and
\:'^^'.^:^-
II. 1 init.
many •'
deities.
Deer. 9 12. For there is One God, and not many, and One is His
Gent. 19, ^^ord, and not many for the Word is God, and He alone
;
c- cf.
has the Face" of the Father^. Being o then such, the Saviour '
2 Pet. 2 '
22. Himself troubled the Jews with these words, TJw Father
iocTxj-
Jlij^igelf which hath sent Me, hath home witness of Me : ye have
41. Ath. neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His Face; and ye
'
p. 211.
^*^^'^ ^^^^ ^^^ Word abiding in you;
for whom He hath sent,
ref 2.
ye beUeve not.
Jj;i,)2,
Suitably has He joined the Word to the
'
37. Face, to shew that the Word of God isHimself Image and
Td Tra-
Expression
^
and Face of His Father ;
'
and that the Jews who
rpiKov
fi^os did not receive Him who spoke to them, thereby did not re-
ceive the Word, which is the Face of God. This too it was
that the Patriarch Jacob having seen, received a blessing
from Him and the name of Israel instead of Jacob, as divine
Gen. 32, Scripture witnesses, saying, And as he passed by the Face of
God, the Sim rose upon Him. And This it was who said,
John 14, He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father, and, / in the
9 10, 30.
;
Pdfji^y. (i)i(i i]iQ Father in Me, and, I and the Father are
o Gen. 32, 30. 31. Sept. there Form and Face of Di-
but one
elSos, also in is
where translated " face," E. T. though vinity, who once Each of Three
is at
"
in John 5. " shape." vid. Justin Tryph. Persons while ;
"
Spirit is a])propri-
126. and supr. p. 154. where vid. note e. ated to the Third Person, though God
for the meaning of the word. In p. 422. is a Spirit. Thus again S. Hippolytus
it was just now used for
" kind." Athan.
says e/c [toD Trarpbs] ^vvaais Koyos, yet
says, p. 154, "there is but one face of shortly before, after mentioning the Two
Godhead ;" yet the word is used of the Persons, he adds, ^vuatxiv 5e p.iav. contr.
Son as synonymous with "image." It Noet 7 and 11. And thus the word
would seem as if there are a certain class "Subsistence," vnocrTaais, which ex-
ofwords, all expressiveof the One Divine presses the One Divine Substance, has
Substance, which admit of more appro- been found more appropriate to express
« priateapplication either ordinarily or that Substance viewed personally.
under circumstances, to This or That Other words may be used correlatively
Divine Person who is also that One of either Father or Son thus the Father ;
Substance. Thus "Being" is more is the Life of the Son, the Son the Life
descriptive of the Father as the 77777?; of the Father; or, again, the Father is
d^oTrjTos, and He is said to be "the in theSon and the Son in the Father.
Being of the Son;" yet the Son is really Others in common, as "the Father's
the One Supreme Being also. On the Godhead is the Son's," ^ irarpiKi) viov
other hand the word " form," /xopcprj, and Oeorris, as indeed the word ouaia itself.
" Other words on the contrary express
face," fJSos, are rather descriptive of
the Divine Substance in the Person of the Substance in This or That Person
the Son, and He is called " the form " only, as
"
Word,"
"
Image," &c.
and " the face of the Father," yet
Ai'ians say that the Son is in, and one tvith, the Father, as ive. 425
God Chap.
one; for thus One, and one the faith in the Father
is
and Son for, though the "Word be Grod, the Lord our Gfod is
;
—XXV.
— - -
one Lord for the Son is proper to that One, and insej)arable
;
'
those whom Thou hast given Me, that they may he one, as
We are. And shortly after Neither pray I for these alone. ;
Ibid.
'~~ "
hut for them also icliieh shall believe on Me through their
word; that they all may he one, as Thou, Father, art in Me,
and I in Thee, that they also may he one in Us, that the
world may helieve that Thou hast sent Me. And the glory
one, even as We
them, and Thou in Me, that
are one ; I in
they may he made perfect in one, and that the world may
know that Thou hast sent Me.'' Then, as having found an
"
evasion, these men of craft If, as we become one in
p
add,
the Father, so also He and the Father are one, and thus He
too is in the Father, how pretend you from Plis saying, I
and the Father are One, and / in the Father and the Father
*
in Me, that He is proper and like the Father's Substance ? P" -^^'
for it follows either that we too are proper to the Father's infr.
HJ. 01 KUKdcppoues. infr. 2(J, b. ol Se'iAaiot. ii. 1 1, c. oi fxriSiv aXt^divovTis. Hist. Ar.
il)id. (1. ol irapatppoi^fs. de Deer. H, a. ol 7. h. ol airdvdpooTroi. Kal fJnaoKaXoi. ibid. e.
aflAioi. Orat. ii. 31) lin. ol Si'do-f/Beis. in ol i/ttotttoi. ibid. \), d. ol roXixripol. ibid,
illud Omn. 3 fin. ol Oavfiaaroi. Ep. JEg. 20, e. ol &<ppove^. ibid. 47, d. &c. &c.
14, c. IC init. ol Travoi'pyot. Ep. Ai,g.
2f
426 This objection inconsistent with our Lord being the Word.
r. 1.
upon such an imagination. If then, as we have many times
§.18.
said, the "Word of God is the same with us, and nothing diifers
from us except in time, let Him be like us, and have the same
^
X<^po.v place with the Father as we have nor let Him be called ;
Trpoaipe-
creais ki-
shewn to be either bad or righteous. For instance, in the
vrt/xara case of the bad, as when it
charges. Be ye not like to horse
Ps. 32, and mule which have no understanding. Or as when it
10;
49, 20. saj^s, complaining of those who have become such, Man,
unto the beasts that perish. And again. They icere as fed
horses in the morning. And the Saviour to expose Herod
said, Tell that fox ; but, on the other hand, charged His '3'
J'^^^
disciples, Behold I send you forth as sheep in the midst o/"Matt. 10,
grace of Him that calleth, and though we are men from the
earth, are yet called gods ', not as the True God or His
'
'^^<>}y
'
Disc,
texts, sucli again is the sense of the passage in John. For
'— he does not Son in the such we
say, that, as the is Father,
must become :
—
whence could it be? when He is God's "Word
and Wisdom, and we were fashioned out of the earth, and
He is by nature and substance Word and true God, (for thus
1 John
speaks John, JFe know that the Son of God is come, and He
6 20
hath given ns an tinderstanding to know Him that is true,
'
'
^^""
unlike us and like the Father.
'
? And therefore, while He is
in nature and truth one with His own Father, we, as being
r Kaja fMl/x7]iTiv. Clem. Alex, t&j;/ 6j- torium. August. Serm. 101, 6. mediator
K6t'aiy ras fief iKTpiiTOfj.^vovs, tqls Se non solum per adjutorium, verum etiara
fjLi/j.ov/j.^i'ovs. Paedag. i. 3. p. 102. ed. per exemplum. August. Trin. iv. I7.
Pott. jui^7)(r€i ToC j/obs e(ceiVou. Naz. Ep. also ix. 21. and Eusebius, though with
102. p. 95. (Ed. Ben.) ut exemplum an heretical meaning, Kara ttju aurov
sequerentur imitando. Leo in various ix'ifjL-qffiv.
Eccl. Theol. iii. 1!), a. For
places, supr. p. 357, note e. ut imitatores inward grace as opposed to teaching,
operum, factorum, sermonum, &c. Iren. vid. supr. p. 360, note g. and p. 393,
llaer. v. 1. exemplum verum et adju- note e.
We attain moral unity by contemplating GocVs real unify. 429
of one kind^ with each other, (foi' from one were all made, and Chap.
XXV. .
one is the nature of all men,) become one with each other in ^-r
o/jLoye-
^
good disposition ', having as our copy the Son's natural unity rer?, p.
" ^ ""
with the Father. For He
taught us meekness from
as Him- '
. -Koiv
on what is best.
17. And for this reason also the words that they may he one in
^^i^c-
in Us maj mean the same as saj^ng, that in the power of the
^7^
Father and the Son they may be one, speaking the same
I Cor. 1,
things for without God this is impossible. And this mode
;
Ps. 60, of speech also we may find in the divine writings, as In God
12; 18 ^riii ^f,g fio great acts; and In God I shall leap over the
wall; and In Thee down our enemies ^
will we tread
Therefore it is plain, that in the name of Father and Son
we shall be able, becoming one, to hold firm the bond of
charity.
18. For, dwelling still on the same thought, the Lord
says, And the glory which TJiou gavesf Me, I have given to
them, that they may he one as We are one. Suitably has He
here too said, not, " that theymay be in Thee as I am, but as
J^e are ; now he who says «s', signifies not identity', but an
'
rav-rd-
e
22 ™age and example of the matter in hand. The Word then
has the real and true identity of nature with the Father but ;
^
yfyovev in us the Word came to be ', for He has put on our body.
^^l^'^j]^^
And Thou Father in Me; "for I am Thy Word, and since
Thou art in Me, because I am Thy Word, and I in them
because of the body, and because of Thee the salvation of
men is perfected in ]\Ie, therefore I ask that they also may
become one, according body that is in Me and accord-
to the
the Same, become one body, having the one Lord in our-
selves. The passage then having this meaning, still more
* *
awo- plainly is refuted the heterodoxy of Christ's enemies. I repeat
i^ > if ^^ ^^^ ^^^^ simply and absolutely ^,
" that
^°two\e- they may be
Kvfifvccs,
"
one in Thee," or that they and I may be one in Thee," God's
supr. p. .
370, enemies had had some plea, though a shameless one but in ;
"°*'®
fact He has not spoken simply, but. As Thou, Father, in Me,
and I in Thee, that they may he all one.
s *
vid. Olear. de Styl. N. T. p. 4. (ed. This remark which comes in abruptly
1702.) is pursued presently, vid. pp. 431, 432.
Analogy is not direct similitude. 431
19. Moreover, using the word as, He signifies those who Chap.
was the whale hell nor did Jonas, when swallowed up,
;
" vid.
p. 18, note n. which is ex- heart in the animal body, it has been
plained by the present passage. When sometimes contended that its increased
Ath. there says, " without all in nature," size is a disease, that
it
may impede
he must mean as here " far from all some of most important functions,
its
things in nature." He says here dis- or even be the means of its dissolution."
" in
tinctly place nothing is far from Copleston on Predestination, p. 129.
God." S. Clement, loc. cit. gives the Shortly before the author says, "A re-
same explanation, as there noticed. It markable example of this kind is that
is observable that the contr. Sab. Greg, argument of Toplady against Freewill,
who, after quoting the text, Ye also
'
longs to bodies, as air; but He com- fifth rib, for can stones hew themselves,
prehends all as a power, for He is an and build themselves into a regular
incorporeal, invisible power, not en- house?'" p. 126. The principle here
circling, not encircled." 10. Eusebius laid down, in accordance with S. Athan.,
says the same thing, Deum circumdat of course admits of being made an ex-
nihil, circumdat Deus omnia noii cor- cuse for denying the orthodox meaning
poraliter ;
virtute enim incorporali adest of " Word, Wisdom, &c." under pre-
omnibus, &c. de Incorpor. i- init. ap. tence that the figurative terms are not
Sirm. Op. p. 68. vid. S. Ambros. Quo- confined by the Church within their
modo creatura in Deo esse potest, &c. proper limits but here the question is
;
manner then we too when the Lord says as, neither become
as the Son in the Father, nor as the Father is in the Son.
For we become one as the Father and the Son in mind
and]
agreement' of spirit, and the Saviour will be as Jonas in the
^
(TvfKpco-
note b.
up, SO did the Saviour descend into hell, but it is but a pa-
Ka\ akxo rallel ,
m like manner, if we too become one, as the Son in
the Father, we shall not be as the Son, nor equal to Him ;
3
Cyril in nature, become as they, when viewed in a certain relation ^
2^- Wherefore the Son Himself, simply and without any
°2'27
&c. condition is in the Father; for this attribute He has by ^7
nature ;
but for us, to whom
needed it is not natural, there is
4
p. 374, corruptible"*. Work Thou then in them, Father; and as Thou
note t
hast given to Me to bear this, grant to them Thy Spirit, that
God^, will believe altogether that Thou hast sent Me, and I
5
Oioipo-
P^Tso^^
have sojourned here. For whence is this their perfecting,
note h. •^3^^ ^ija^^ I^
Thy Word, having borne their body, and become
man, have perfected the work, which Thou gavest Me,
Father ? And the work is perfected, because men, redeemed
certain notions, will appear to reject beginning of the foregoing note, follows
other significations, as it were, by a S. Athanasius "
all Analogy does not
:
natural power." Heresy and Orthod. mean the similarity of two things, but
pp. 21, 47. Elsewhere he speaks of the similarity or sameness of two re-
"
words which were used in a language lations .... Things most unlike and dis-
now dead to represent objects . which . . cordant in their nature may be strictly
are now supposed to express fiffuraiively analogous to one another. Thus a cer-
something spiritual and quite beyond tain proposition may be called the basis
the knowledge and comprehension of of a system .... it serves a similar office
man." p. 96. Of course Ath. assumes and purpose .... the system rests upon
that, since the figures and parallels it;
it is useless to proceed with the ar-
given us in Scripture have but a partial gument till this is well established : if
application, there/ore there is given us tiiis were removed, the system must
also an interpreter to apply them. fall." On Predest. pp. 122, 3.
z Here too the writer
quoted in the
JFe are in God by means of the gift of tlie Spirit. 433
from no longer remain dead; but being made gods\ have Chap.
sin,
in each other, by looking at Me, the bond of charity ^" p. 432,
——
»
-
expressions in this passage, have been led into many words 2 V"* ; /
but blessed John in his Epistle will shew the sense of the fxou t^s
words, concisely and much more perfectly than we can. And "1°^^^'
he will both disprove the interpretation of these irreligious fin.
'
men, and will teach how we become in God and God in us ;
ffrepov
and how again we become One in Him, and how far the Son
differs in nature from us, and will stop the Arians from any
longer thinking that they shall be as the Son, lest they hear
itsaid to them. Thou art a man and not God, and, Stretch not Ez. 28,2.
thyself being poor, beside the rich. John then thus writes ;
^o^^*
Herebii know we that tee dwell in Him and He in us, 1 John 4,
because He
hath given us of His Spirit. Therefore because
of the grace of the Spirit which has been given to us, in
*
Him we come to be, and He in us ;
and since it is the Spirit ^
p- 430,
plies It Himself to all and the Spirit does not unite the
; 1 ?
AVord to the Father, but rather the Spirit receives from the
Word ^. And the Son is in the Father, as His proper Word
and Radiance but we, apart from the Spirit, are strange
;
rather, arc not the Arians confuted on every side ? and espe-
cially by John,
that the Son is in the Father in one way, and
we become in Him in another, and that neither we shall ever
be as He, nor is the Word as we ; except they shall dare, as
a vid. the end of this section and 25 Cat. xvi. 24. Epiph. Ancor. 67 init.
«
p. 366, in Son and in Father, because that that Spirit is in us, which
note c.
'^
vofjLt(r6r\- is in the Word which is in the Father. When then a man
aofxida
falls from the Spirit for any wickedness, if he
repent upon
*
supr. his fall, the grace remains irrevocably to such as are
willing^;
p. 234.
otherwise he who has fallen is no longer in God, (because
that Holy Spirit and Paraclete which is in God has deserted
him,) but the sinner shall be in him to whom he has subjected
himself, as took place in Saul's instance ;
for the Spirit of
1 Kings God departed from him and an evil spirit afflicted him.
](!, 14.
^ ^f\Tiu>ffei and SO ad Afros, it is rather some external advance.
irpa^eais,
TpSiTwv ^sXTicixris. 8. Supr. pp. 234, 242.
All this the Arians cannot hear to hear. 435
derstand knoicledge) nor endure reKgious words, but find them ""f'"' Ath.
Disc. 1. For
behold, as if not wearied in their words of irreligion,
III.
but with hardened Pharaoh, while they hear and see the Sa-
§. 26.
^ viour's human attributes in the Gospels % they have utterly
Trarpi-
KTJS 6(6- Godhead \ and
forgotten, like Samosatene, the Son's paternal
TTJTOS,
p. 400,
with arrogant and audacious tongue they say, " How can the
note d.
Son be from the Father by nature, and be like Him in sub-
stance^, who says. All power is given unto Me; and the Father
KaT ov-
ffiav judgcth no man, hut hath committed all judgment unto the
Mat. 28, Son ; and The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all
18.
John things His hand; he that heliereth in the Son hath
into
5,
22.
everlasting life; and again, All things are delivered -unto
John 3,
35 36. Me of My Father, and no one knoiceth the Father save the
Mat. 11,
Son, and he to tchomsoever the Son will reveal Him; and
27.
John 6, again. All that the Father hath given unto Me, shall come
37.
3 infr.
§§
to Me ^" On this they observe, " If He was, as ye say. Son
35—41.
by nature, He had no need to receive, but He had by nature
as a Son."
" Or how can He be the natural and
2. true Power of the
John 12, who near upon the season of the passion JYow
Father, saj's,
27. 28.
is My soul troubled, and what shall I say ? Father, save Me
from this hour ; hut for this came I unto this hour. Father,
glorify Thy Name. Then came there a voice from heaven,
3
This Oration alone, and this en- objections which remain chiefly relate
of texts from the Gospels
tirely, treats ;
to our Lord's economy for us. Hence
hitherto from the Gospel according to they lead Athan. to treat more dis-
St. John, and now chiefly from the first
tinctly of the doctrine of the Incarna-
three. From the subject of these por- tion, and to anticipate a refutation of
tions of Scripture, it follows that the both Nestorius and Eutyches.
Texts from the Gospels urged against our Lord's Divinity. 437
^vas troubled in spirit and testified and said, Verily, verily, oi.
I say unto you, that one of you shall betray Me'^." Then these ^'nfr- §§•
^io Oo.
" If He were Power, He had not feared, 2 kuko-
perverse' men argue ;
parts of Ca3sarea Philippi, He asked the disciples whom men jyj^t ^^^
said that He was and when He was at Bethany He asked
;
^^•
where Lazarus lay ;
and He said besides to His disciples, 34.
Sow many ye*? How then," say they, "is He
loaves have
^l,
^\
before that had prayed, Glorify Thy Name, and, Father, j^^j^^^ ^^
glorify Thou Me with the glory which I had with Thee-^\^1i
before the xvorld was. And He used to pra}'' in the deserts
and charge His disciples to pray lest they should enter into
temptation ; and. The spirit indeed is icilling. He said, but Mat. 20,
tlie flesh is iceali. And, Of thatday and that hour knoweth ^j^rk
no man, no, nor the Anr/els, ^^' ^^•
neither the Son "." Upon this again
say the miserable men, "If the Son were, according to your 42-50.
interpretation*, eternally existent with God, He had not been jj^'^j"'""'
"
speak yet more daringly Why in the first instance did the ;
438 Comparison of the Avians loith the Jeics.
Disc.
III.
Word become flesh?" and they might add; "For howcould He,
being God, become man? "or, "How could the Immaterial bear a
"
body ? or they might speak with Caiaphas still more Judaically,
"
Wherefore at all, did Christ, being a man, make Himself
^°*^' ^" ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^® ^^^® ^^® ^^^^ *^®^ muttered when
fin.''i83
'Son of Joseph, whose father and mother ice know? hoio then
is it that He saith, Before Abraham
was, I am, and I came
down from Jbeaven?" the Arians on the other hand make
" How can He
response'' and say conformably, be Word or
God who slept as man, and wept, and inquired?" Thus both
parties deny the Eternity and Godhead of the Word in con- -\
^
sequence of those human attributes which the Saviour took
on Him by reason of that flesh which He bore.
§. 28.
6.
Extravagance then like this being Judaic, and Judaic
after the mind of Judas the traitor, let them
openly confess
themselves scholars of Caiaphas and Herod, instead of
cloking
Judaism with the name of Christianity, and let them deny
outright, as we have said before, the Saviour's appearance in
2 oiKiiov
the flesh, for this doctrine is akin " to their heresy ;
or if they
^ iTTttKovovaiv. Montfaucon (Onomas- word. vid. Apol. contr. Ar. 88. (O. T.
ticon in t. 2 fin.) so interprets this p. 122, note k.)
Arians s/iouid become Christians, if they will not become Jews. 439
p 235.
beguiled, then let them not say what the Jews say for if ;
with the words of religion those ears of yours which bias- p. 208,
Then at once will truth shine on you out of darkness, and ye g^^^*
will no longer reproach us with holding two Eternals'^, but ye
will yourselves acknowledge that the Lord is God's true Son
by nature, and not as merely^ eternal*^, but revealed as co-i^aTrAws
existing in the Father's eternity. For there are things called
eternal of which He is Framer for in the twenty-third Psalm
;
man was mortal and immortal,) but an and our Lord's high not this,
title is
incongruity in the ideas wliich it intro- but that He is " the Son," and thereby
duces. Not indeed ideas directly and eternal in the Father's eternity, or
wholly contradictory of each other, as there was not ever when He was not,
*'
circulus quadratus," but such as are and "Image" and "Radiance." The
partially or indirectly antagonist, as per- same line of thought is implied through-
" montes sine valle." To say that out his proof of our Lord's eternity in
haps
the Father iswholly and absolutely the Orat. i. ch. 4 — 6. pp. 195 210. This—
one infinitely-simple God, and then that is worth remarking, as constituting a
the Son is also, and yet that the Father between ancient and
special distinction
is eternally distinct from the Son, is to modern Scripture proofs of the doctrine,
propose ideaswhichwe cannot harmonize and as coinciding with what was said
together; and our reason is reconciled to supr. p. 203, note c. p. 341, note i. His
this state of the case only by the con- modeof proofisstill moreclearlybrought
sideration (though fully by means of it) by what he proceeds to say about the
that no idea of ours can embrace the (tkottus, or general bearing or drift of the
simple truth, while we are obliged to Christian faith, and its availableness
separate it into portions, and view it in as a Kavuiv or rule of interpretation,
aspects, and adumbrate it under many
440 We must interpret Scripture by the Regula Fidei.
Disc, these things were made but if even of things everlasting He
;
from the Father, and never was it when He was not, but
He was always and being the Father's Image and Radiance,
;
ing bands." And in like manner S. Cone. Eph. (p. 1529. Labbe.) "Not
T(ro distinct rieu's of onr Lord in Scripture. 441
men, first John saying. In the beginning was the Word, and^^^'^ '-
the Word teas icith God, and the JFord teas God. The same
iras in the Ijeginning icith God. All things ivere made by
Him, and without Him was made not one thing; next, And^-'^^-
the Word urts made flesh and dwelt among iis, and we be-
held His glory, the glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father ;
and next Paul writing, WJio being in the form of God, thought
Pl^''- 2>
only did Mary bear her Elder," says Chrysost. ap. Caspian. Incarn. vii. 30.
Cassian in answer to an objector,
"
Happily do some understand by the
" but her
Author, and giving birth to
'
closed gate,' by which only ' the Lord
Him from whom she received it, she God of Israel ei:ters,' that Prince ou
became parent of her Parent. Surely whom the gate is closed, to be the
it is as easy for God to give nativity Virgin Mary, who botli before and after
to Himself, as to man; to be born of her bearing remained a Mrgin." Je-
man as to niake men born. For God's rom. in Ezek. 44 init.
" Let them tell
power is not circuniscribtd in IIU own us," says Capreolus of Carthage, "how
Person, that He should not do in Him- is that Man from beaven, if He be not
self vfhat He can do in all." Incarn. God conceived in the womb?" ap.
iv. 2.
'*
The One God Only-begotten, Sirm. 0pp. t. i. p. 2JC. " He is made
of an ineffable origin fruui God, is in- in thee," says S. Austin, " who made
troduced into the womb of the Holy thee, . nay, through whom heaven
. .
Virgin, and grows into the form of a and earth is made ; the Word of . .
human body. He who contrives all, God in thee is made flesh, receiving
. .
brought forth according to the
is flesh, not losing Godhead. And the
law of a human birth ; He at whose Word is joined, is coujjled tj the tlesh,
voice Archangels tremble . . and the and of this so high wedding thy womb
world's elements are dissolved, is heard is the nuptial chamber, &.('..'' Serm.
in the wailing of an infant, t^c." Hil. 291, fi.
"Say, O
blessed Mary," says
" " what was It which
Trin. ii. 25. My beloved is white
'
S. Hippolytus, by
and ruddy ;' white truly, because the thee was conceived in the womb, what
Brightniss of the Father, ruddy, be- carried by thee in that virgin frame ?
cause the Birth of a Virgin. In Him It was the Word of God, &c." ap.
shines and glows the colour of each Theod. Eran. " We
i.
p. 65. Lave
nature He did not begin from a
;
. . also as a I'hysician," says S. Ignatius,
" our Lord God Jesus the
Virgin, but the Everlasting c;ime into Christ, who
a Virgin." Ambros. Virgin, i. n. 47- before the world was Only-begotteu
"
Him, who, coming in His simple God- Son and Word, and afterwards was man
head, not heaven, not earth, not sea, also from Mary the Virgin, the In-
not any creature had endured, Ilini the corjioreal in a body, the Impassible,
-
2g
442 lie became man, not came into man.
Disc, '
^he interpretation which they suggest, will perceive how in
5,av^ the beginning the Father said to Him, Let there he ligJit,
,
vid. p. and Let there he a firmament^ and Let us mahe man; but in ,
Gen. fulness of the ages, He sent Him into the world, not that He
i ,
might judge the world, but that the world by Him might be
3. G. 26.
Mattel ^^^^^d, and shall bring forth a Son, and they shall call His Name
2:{.
Emmanuel, ichich, being interpreted, is God with us. The
'
^'
reader then of divine Scripture may acquaint himself with
these passages from the older books and from the Gospels on ;
the other hand he will perceive that the Lord became man ;
Joiin for the word, he says, became flesh, and dwelt among us.
I,
^
8. And He became man, and did not come into man ;
for ]
note g'.
nor had those who saw Him been startled, saying, Whence is
He ? and wherefore dost Thou, being a man, make Thyself
God ? for they were familiar with the idea, from the words,
^
5
ad And the Word
of the Lord came to the Prophets one by one.
11 'll ad
-^^t now, since the Word of God, by whom all things came
Max. 2. to be, endured to become also Son of man, and humbled Him-
God's u-isdom ; for the Word, as John says, became flesh ; (it
of Scripture to call man by the
®
fi
iiifr. iv.
being the custom name of
Joei'2 flGshy as it says by Joel the Prophet, / icill pour out Spirit My
28.
upon all flesh; and as Daniel said to Astyages, I may not
Dr. 5. u'orsliip idols made icith hands, but the Living God, who hath
created the heaven and the earth, and hath sovereignty over
% 31. all flesh ; for both he and Joel call mankind flesh.) Of old
time He was wont to come and
to the Saints individually,
to send His own Son made of a icoman, inade nndcr the Chap.
XXVI.
Late,) then it is said, that He took flesh and became man,
Gal. 4. 4,
and in that flesh He
sufiered for us, (as Peter says, Christ 1 Pet. 4,
1.
therefore having suffered for us in the flesh,) that it might be
shewn, and that all might believe, that whereas He was ever
God, and hallowed those to whom He came, and ordered all
things according to the Father's will ^, afterwards for our
sakes He became man, and bodilij, as the Apostle saj^s, the Col. 2, 9
capable ;
while on the other hand the works proper to the
Word Himself, such as to raise the dead, to restore sight to
the blind, and to cure the woman with an issue of blood,
He did through his own body ^. And the Word bore the
f Kara rh vid. Orat. 63. S tovtw
fiovK-r]fj.a. i.
xP^/^^''"^ opyavoj infr. 42.
m and " When and opyavov irphs rrj^' ivspy^iav koI t^v
infr. p. 490, notes n.
God commands others, then the hearer eK\afj.\f/iv TTJs BedrriTos. 53. Tliis was a
answers, for each of these has the word much used afterwards by the Apol-
Mediator Word which makes known the linarians, who looked on our Lord's
will of the Father but when the Wurd
;
manhood as merely a manifestation of
Himself works and creates, there is no God. vid. p. 291, note k. vid. (rxVfJ^
questioning and answer, for the Fatlier opyaviKhv in Apoll. i. 2, 15. vid. a pa-
is in Him, and the Word in the Father; rallel in Euseb. Laud. Const, p. 536.
but it suffices to will, and the work is However, it is used freely by Athan.
done." supr. p. 324. where vid. note e. g. infr. 35, 63. Incarn. JJ, 9, 43, J4.
b. for passages in which Ps. 33, 9. is And he mentions -rrphs (pavepwcnv Ka\
taken to shew the unity of Father and yvieatv, 41 fin. but he also insists upon
Son from the instantaneousness of the its being not merely for manifestation,
accomplishment upon the willing, as else our Lord might have come in a
well as the Son's existence before area- higher nature, ibid. iJ. vid. also 44.
tion. Hence the Son not only works Tliis use of upyavov must not be con-
/cara rb ^ouA7)^a, but is the /SoiiA?; of the fused with iis heretical application to
Father, ibid, note c. For the contrary our Lord's Divine Nature, vid. Basil
Arian view, even when it is highest, de Sp. S. n. 19 tin. of which supr. p.
vid. Euseb. Ecd. Theol. iii. 3. quoted 1 18, note n. It may be added that <pa-
quently as the Arians, uses it of the p. 1275. ed. Ben. This interchange is
Father. Catech. x. 5. .\i. passim, xv. 25, called theologically the avTi^oais or com-
&c. The difference between the or- municatio iStcojxa.Tw;'. " Because of the
thodox and Arian views on this point, perfect union of the flesh which was as-
is clearly drawn out
by S. Basil contr. sumcd, and of the Godhead which as-
Eunom. i. 21. sumed it, the names are interchanged,
2 G 5J
444 He iooli oil Him the infirmities of the flesh.
Disc. infirmities of the flesh, as His own, for His was the flesh ;
III.
'
and the flesh ministered to the works of the Godhead, be-
vnovpyi
cause the Godhead was in it, for the bod j^jwas^ God's*. And
Is. 5n, 4 well has the Prophet said carried; and has not said, " He re-
2
iOepd- medied '"our infirmities, lest, as being external to the body,
TTfVafV
and only healing it, as He has always done, He should leave
men subject still to death ;
but He carries our infirmities, and
3
TraOwv, He Himself bears our sins, that it might be shewn that He
vid. p.
440, r. 5. became man for us, and that the body which in Him bore
•*
supr. them, was His proper body and, while He received no hurt^;
p. 254.
1 Pet. 2, Himself by bearing our sins in His bod// on the tree, as Peter
24.
speaks, we men were redeemed from our own afiections ^, and
^. 32. ^
were filled with the righteousness of the Word. Whence it
so that the human is called from the dead and unclean, thus and much more
divine and the divine from the human. the spiritual virtue of God the Word
Wherefore He who was crurified is would suffer nothing in substance nor
called by Paul Lord of glory, and He receive hurt, &c." Euseb. de Laud.
who is worshipped by all creation of Const, p. 530. and 538. also Dem.
things in heaven, in earth, and under Evang. vii. p. 340. "The injuries of
the earth is named Jesus, &c." Nyssen. the passion even the Godhead bore, but
in Apoll. t. 2. pp. 097, «• Leon. Ep. the passion His flesh alone felt; as we
28, 51. Ambros. de fid. ii. 58. Nyssen. rightly say that a sunbeam or a body of
de Beat. p. 707- Cassian. Incarn. vi. flame can he cut indeed by a sword but
22. Aug. contr. Serra. Ar. c. 8 inir. not divided. I will speak yet more
Plain and easy as such statements seem plainly; the Godhead [divinitatis, qu.
in this and some following notes, they tas] was fi.Ted with nails, but could not
are of the utmost importance in the Itself be pierced, since the flesh was
Nestorian and Eutychian controversies. exposed and offered room for the wound,
8eov ?iv (Tcofxa. also ad Adelph. 3
i
but God remained invisible, &c." Vigil,
ad iviax. 2. and so rrjv irTwx^vcracav confr. Eutych. ii.
p. 503.- (B. P. ed.
" There were
(pvaiv Oeov '6X7]]/ yevoiJ.ivT]v. C- Apoll. ii. lf»24.) five together on
II. rb TraQos rod \6yov. ibid. 10, c. the Cross, when Christ was nailed to it;
capl
rov \6you. infr. 34. awfxa aotpias infr. 53. the sun light, which first received the
also supr. p. 290, r. 1. TrdOos XpicrTov nails and the spear, and remained un-
rod 6eov fiov. Ignat. Rom. 0. 6 6ehs divided from the Cross and unhurt by
iriTtovQ^v. Melit. ap. Anast
Hodeg. 12. the nails, next, &c." Anast. Hodeg.
Dei passiones. TertuU. de Carn. Christ. c. 12. p. 220.
(ed. ICOB.) also p. 222.
5. Dei interemptores. ibid, caro Deitatis. Vid. also the beautiful passage in
Leon. Serm. 05 fin. Deus mortuus et Pseudo-Basil " God in flesh, not work-
:
sepultus. Vigil, c. Eut. ii. p. 502. vid. ing with aught intervening as in the
supr. p. 244, note 1. Yet Athan. objects prophets, but having taken to Him a
to the phrase, " God suffered in the manhood connatural with Himself
flesh," i, e. as used by the Apollinarians. {av/x(puri, i. e.
joined to His nature) and
vid. contr. Apoll. ii. 13 .in. made one, and through His flesh akin
k ov^iv €/8Aa7rT6To. " For He was to usdrawing up to Him all humanity.
not shut up in the body, nor was He in .... What was the manner of tbe God-
such sort in the body, as not to be else- head in flesh ? as fire in iron, not
where, &c." Incarn. 17. Also ilixdir- transitively, but by communication.
T6T0 fxlv yap avrhs ouSey. Ike, ibid. 54. For the fire does not dart into the iron,
^AairrSufvos,
fj.^ aWa i^acpavi^coy. infr. but remains there and communicates
" For the
34, b. Sun too which He to it of its own virtue, not impaired by
made and we see, makes its circuit in tbe communication, yet filling wholly
the sky, and is not defiled by touching, Hom. in Sanct.
its recipient, &c."
&c." tie Incarn. I7. '-As the rays of Christ. Gen. (t. 2. p. 590. ed. Ben.) also
sun-light would not suffer at all, thoush Riiffin. in Symb. 12. Cyril. Quod unus
tilling all things and touching bodies est Christus. p. 77''- Damasc. F. O.
ThroiKjh the properties of the Jfeah He did divine works. 445
was when the flesh the Word was not external Chap.
that, siifFercd,
to it ;
and therefore is the passion said to he His : and when
He did divinely His Father's works, the flesli was not ex-
ternal to Him, but in the body itself did the Lord do them'. A'!^"'
'
Hence, when made man, He said, // / do not the icorks q/'john lo,
Me, believe the works, that ye may know that the Father is in cam. 18. Me
and I in Him.
10. And thus when there was need to raise Peter's wife's
mother who was sick of a fever. He stretched forth His hand
humanly, but He stopped the illness divinely. And in the
case of the man blind from the birth, human was the spittle
which gave forth from the flesh, but divinely did He
He
open the eyes through the clay. And in the case of Lazarus,
He forth a human voice, as man
gave but divinely, as God, ;
into Himself in pity and in power, that Eph. (p, 1620. Labbe.) These are in-
either nature was in other, and neither stances of what is theologically called
in the other lost its own propriety." the Qf:o.vhfiKT\ ivepyeta, i. e. the union of
" the energies of both Natures in otie act.
Serm. 54, Suscepit nos in suam
2.
" In-
nee nos- fiT) cpafTaaia aAA' a\TjOws. vid.
proprietatem ilia natura, quce
tris sua, nee suis nostra consumeret, carn. 18, d. ad Epict. 7, c. The passage
&c." Serm. 7-'. p. 2Ji(i. vid. also Ep. is quoted by S. Cyril. Apol. adv. Orient,
1(;5, (J. Serm. 'M), 5. C>ril. Cat. p. 11)4.
iv. 1».
Xtv/jLtda
creature, no ordinary man, but the natural and true Son
'^
from God, who has become man, yet is not the less Lord and
God and Saviour.
§. 33, 11. AVho will not admire this? or who will not agree that
such a thing is truly divine ? for if the works of the Word's ,
Godhead had not taken place through the body, man had ^ j
•
eOeoTToi- not been made god*; and again, had not the properties of the
r,ev
flesh been ascribed to the "Word, man had not been thoroughly
5
p. 254, delivered from them*; but though they
had ceased for a little
note k.
while, as I said before, still sin had remained in him and
p. 360,
note g.
corruption, as was the case with mankind before Him and ;
p. 378,
note e. for this reason: Many — for instance have been made holy and
^
p. 447, clean from all sin nay, Jeremias
;
was hallowed even from
note u.
o ovK
&\\ov, aAA.a rov Kvpiov and : and denying the nature, they do not
believe in the economy and not be-
so ovx eripov rivhs, Incarn. 18; also ;
Oraf. i. 45. supr. p. 244. and Orat. iv. lieving in the economy, they forfeit the
35. Cyril. Thes. p. 197. and Anathem. salvation." Procl. ad Armen. p. 516.
11. who defends the phrase against the ed. 16;i0.
Orientals. q Koiv6v. opposed to thiov. vid. infr.
P " If any happen to be scandalized p. 472, r. 6. Cyril. Epp. p. 23, e. com-
by the swathing bands, and His lying munem, Ambros. de Fid. i. 94.
in a manger, and the gradual increase vid. Jer. i. 5.
'^
And so S. Jerome,
according to the flesh, and the sleep-
S. Leo, &c. as mentioned in Corn, a
ing in a vessel, and the wearying in Lap. in loc. who adds that S. Ephrem
in due considers IMoses also sanctified in the
journeying, and the hungering
time, and whatever else happen to one womb, and S. Ambrose Jacob; S. Jerome
who has become really man, let them implies a similar gilt in the case of
know that, making a mock of the suf- Aselia, ad Marcell. (Ep. 24, 2.) And
ferings, they are denying the
natui-e ;
so S. John Baptist, Maldon. in Luc.
that He might hallow and sjnritual/'ze what He had tahen. 44(
the womb, and John, while yet in the womb, leapt for joy at 9"'^,^-
the voice of Mary Mother of God ^ nevertheless death ^
•^
Rom. /- ;
5,
reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those that had 14.
Him. Therefore in like manner not without reason has He P' ^**''
note e.
Austin,) refers to the instance of S. made flesh of the Virgin, in the way He
Mary; — perhaps from the circumstance knoweth, &c." Procl. id Armen. p. 616.
of its not being mentioned in Scripture. also Leon. Serm. 22. pp. 69. 71- Sertn.
s 6€ot6kov. For instances of this word 26. p. 88. Nyssen contr. Apoll. t. 2,
vid. Origen. ap. Socr. vii. 32. Euseb. V. p. 696. Cyril. Epp. p. 138, 9. in Joan,
Const, iii. 43. in Psalm p. 703. Alexandr. p. 95. ChrysoL Serm. 148.
X d€OT6Kov.
E]). ad Alex. ap. Theodor. Hist. i. 3. p. supr. p. 420, note i. p. 440,
745. Athan. (supra) Cyril. Cat. x. 19. note e. and just above, note s. For
" mater Dei " vid. before S.
Julian Itnper. ap. Cyril, c. Jul. viii. p. Leo,
262. Amphiloch. Orat. 4. p. 41. (if Am- Ambros. de Virg. ii. 7. Cassian. Incarn.
phil.)ed. 1644. Nyssen. Ep. ad Eustath. ii. 5. vii. 25. Vincent. Lir. Commonit.
J).
101)3. Chrysost. apud Suicer Symb. 21. It is obvious that dior6Kos, though
framed as a test against Nestorians, was
p. 240. Greg. Naz. Orat. 29, 4. Ep. 181.
]).
85. ed. Ben. Antiochus and Ammon. equally effective against ApoUinarians
ap. Cyril, de Recta Fid. iip. 4!), 60. and Eutychians, who denied that our
Pseudo-Dion, contr. Samo?. 5. Pseudo- Lord had taken human flesh at all, as is
Basil. Horn. t. 2. p. 600. ed. Ben. observed by Facundus Def. Trium Cap.
t
iStoTToiovfxefov. vid. also infr. p.
455, i. 4. And so S. Cyril, " Let it be care-
r. 6.ad Epict. 6, e. fragm. ex Eutliym. fully observed, that nearly this whole
(t. p. 1275.
i. ed. Ben.) Cyril, in Joann. contest about the faith has been created
p. 151, a. For 'iSiov, which occurs so against us for our maintaining that the
frequently here, vid. Cyril. Anathem. 11. Holy Virgin is jNlother of God now, if ;
And o'lKeiccTai, contr. Apoll. ii. 16, e. we hold," as was the calumny, " that the
Cyril. Schol. de Incarn. p. 782, d. Con- Holy Body of Christ our common Sa-
oil. Eph. pp. 1644, d. 1697, b. (Hard.) viour was from heaven, and not born
Damasc. F. O. iii. 3. p. 208. ed. Yen. of her, how can she be considered as
Vid. Petav. de Incarn. iv. 15. Mother of God?" Epp. pp. 106, 7-
" vid. Vet these sects, as the Arians, main-
pp. 245, 247, &c. p. 374, note
t. Vid. also iv. 33. Incarn. c. Ariau. 12. tained the term. vid. supr. p. 292,
" Since God the note n.
contr. Apoll. i. I7. ii- 6.
Word willed to annul the passions,
448 . The Word suffered,
know, and to sleep, and to weep, and to ask, and to flee, and
to be born, and to deprecate the cup, and in a word to
undergo all that belongs' to the flesh ^, let it be said, as is
" Christ then
congruous, in each case, hungering and thirst-
us the and " He did not know, and
ing for in flesh ;" saying
being buffeted, and toiling for us and "being in the flesh f^
exalted too, and born, and growing flesh;" and "fearing in the
Mat. 26, and hiding in the flesh;" and "saying, // it he jwssib/e let
this cu]} 2^<^(S^ from Me, and being beaten, and receiving,
the flesh. For on this account has the Apostle himself said,
tspecially our Lord's flesh. F. O. iv. the flesh and physical infirmities and
18. p. 286. (Ed. Ven.) for the words whatever such is blameless, &c." Cyril.
&c. vid. supr. p. 380, note h.
GioiiffQai, de Rect. Fid. p. 18. "As a man He
" All this
2
belongs to the Economy, doubts, as a man He is troubled it is ;
not to the Godhead. On this account not His Power (virtus) that is troubled.
He says, Now is '
My
soul troubled,' .. . not His Godhead, but His soul, &c."
so troubled as to seek for a release, if Ambros. de Fid. ii. n. 56. vid. a beautiful
escape were possible. ... As to hunger passage in S. Basil's Horn. iv. 5. in
is no blame, nor to sleep, so is it none which he insists on our Lord's having
to desire the present life. Christ had wept to shew us how to weep neither
a body pure from sin?, but not exempt too muLdi nor too little.
but in the flesh, not in His Godhead. 449
Christ then having suffered, not in His Godhead, but for us Chai>.
is,
away our sins, and in Him is no sin. And this being so, no
heretic shall object, "AVherefore rises the flesh, being by
nature mortal ? and if it rises, why not hunger too and thirst,
and sufler, and remain mortal? for it came from the earth,
and how can its natural condition pass from it?" since the flesh
is able now to make answer to this so contentious heretic,
" I am from
earth, being by nature mortal, but afterwards I
became the Word's flesh, and He carried my afiections,
though He is without them
^
and so I became free from ^
;
airaevs
Word's, it overbears the might of cor- and tirstfruit of thofe who are refashioned
ruption and death, so, I think, since unto newness of life in the Spirit, and
the soul became His who knew not unto immortality of body, and He will
error, it has an unchangeable condition transmit to the whole human race the
for all good things established in it, and firm security of the Godiiead, as by
tar more vigorous than tlic sin that of participation and by grace." Cyril, de
old time tyrannized over us. For, lirst Rect. Fid. p. IS.
and only of men on the earth, Christ
•45Q It icas One, loho wrought as God and suffered as man.
4
p. 17,
enemies the Arians ;
for looking at what is human in the
!;
J*
P"
Saviour, they have judged Him a creature. Therefore they
5
-yeVfo-i)/ ought, looking also at the divine works of the Word, to deny"=
the generation of His body", and henceforth to rank them-
'
jgg'jj^fj.
iv. 23. c. selves with Manichees ^ But for them learn the}^, however
Tr. C. ix. tardily, that the Word became fiesh ; and let us, retaining the
1 init. 3
general scope' of the faith, acknowledge that what they
"
(rKoi:6v, interpretill, has a right interpretation ^.
supr.
8 aa}>
^ vid. infr. 39 —
41. and p. 479, note b. passible; that, as was befitting for
*" "
Being God, and existing as Word, our cure, One and the Same Mediator
r. "j1.
while He remained what He was, He between God and man, the man Jesus
became flesh, and a child, and a man, Christ, might both be capable of death
no change profaning the m3'stery. The from the one, and incapable from the
Same both works wonders and suffers, other." Leo's Tome (Ep. 28, 3.) also Hil.
by the miracles signifying that He is Trin. ix. 1 1 fin. " Vagit iiifans, sed in
what He was, and by the sufferings ccelo est, &c." ibid. x. 54. Ambros. de
giving proof that He had become what Fid. ii. 77- Erat vermis in cruce sed
He had framed." Procl. ad Armen. dimittebat peccata. Non habebat
" Without loss then to the
p. C15. pro- speciem, sed plenitudinem divinitatis,
priety of either nature and substance," &c. Id. Epist. i. 46, n. 5. Theoph. Ep.
(salva propriefate, and so TertuUian, Pasch. 6. ap. Cone. Ephes. p. 1404.
Salva est utriusque proprietas sub- Hard.
stantiae, &c. in Prax. 27-) " yet with "^
Thus
heresies are partial views of
their union in one Person, Majesty the starting from some truth
truth,
takes on it littleness, Power infirmity, which they exaggerate, and disowning
Eternity mortality, and, to pay the and protesting against other truth,
debt of our estate, an inviolable Nature which they fancy inconsistent with it.
is made one with a nature that is vid. supr. p. 219, note b.
CHAPTER XXVII.
TEXTS EXPLAINED ; TENTHLY, MATTHEW XXviii. 18.
JOHN iii. 35. &c.
These texts intended to preclude the Sabellian notion of the Son they ;
our sake, that we might receive and not lose, as receiving in Him. And
consistently with other parts of Scripture, which shew that He had the
power, &c., before He received it. He was God and man, and His
actions are often at once divine and human.
1. For, T/ie Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things joUn 3,
into His hand; and, All things are given unto Me of My ^'^^^
Father; and, / can do nothing of Myself, hut as I hear, Iii,V-
'
Judge ; and the like passages, do not shew that the Son once 30^
—
had not these prerogatives, (for had not He eternally what
the Father has, who is the Only Word and Wisdom of the
Father in substance, who also says. All that the Father hath John 2(>,
• 15 •
17
are Mine, and what are Mine, are the Father's? for if the jq'
things of the Father are the Son's and the Father hath them
ever, it is plain that what the Son hath, being the Father's,
—
were ever in the Son,) not then because once He had them
not, did He say this, but because, whereas the Son hath i
For lest a man, perceiving that the Son has all that the §• 36.
^
Father hath, from the unvarying likeness and identity of ana- '
given unto Me, and / have received, and Are delivered to Me, J^Vj^j^/
only to shew that He is not the Father, but the Father's Word, 2«, 18.
and the Eternal Son, who because of His likeness to the ig.
yet has from the Father and the Father indeed not from any,
;
but the Son from the Father. For as in the instance of the
radiance, if the radiance itself should say, "All places the
light hath given me to euligliten, and I do not enlighten from
myself, but as the light wills," yet, in saying this, it does
not imply that it once had not, but it means, "I am \
proper to the light, and all things of the light are mine ;" ^
Unity. Nothing can be named which Person is a relation of the Son towards
The Father gives the Son all things, yet still has them. 453
1'. 422,
and distinct from and be-
the Father of times." Chrysost. in Joan. Hom. ii.
;
" In note 1.
yond that relation, He is hut the One 3 fin. respect of the Adorable
God, who is also the Father.
'
This and most Royal Trinity, '
first and
* '
sacred subject has been toui lied upon second have no place for the God- ;
supr. p. 412, noted. In other words, head is higher than number and times."
there is an indestructible essential re- Isid. Pel. Ep. .3, 18.
" He
calls," says
lation existing in the One Indivisible S. jSIaximus commenting on Pseudo-
manner Three) yet without the no- Trinity,' since not number, but glory is
tion of number really coming in. expres'^edin The Lord God '
is One
When we speak of " Person," we mean Lord.'" in Dionys. Opp. t. 2. p. 101.
" We do not understand
nothing moie than the One God in sub-
' '
one in the
stance, viewed relatively to Him the One Divine Substance, as in the creatures ;
God, as viewed in that Correlative which in whom what is properly one is not to
we therefore call another Person. These be seen for what is one in number, as
;
various statements are not here in- in our case, is not properly one. It is
tended to ex|)!ain, but to bring home to not one in number, or as the beginning
the mind ivhat it is which faith re- of number, any more than It is as
ceives. We
say "Father, Son, and magnitude or as the beginning of mag-
Spirit," but when we would abstract a nitude .... That One is ineffable and
general idea of Them in order to number indesci'ibable is the cause of
;
since It
Them, our abstraction really does but what is one kvd^os ivoiruiSv."
itselfjTrctn-Tjs
" Three
carry us back to the One Substance. Eulog. ap. Phot. 230. p. ii(i4.
There will be different ways of express- what ? I answer, Fi'.ther and Son and
ing this, but such seen)S the meaning of Holy Ghost. See, he urges, you have
such passages as the following. " Those said Three; but explain Three what.'
who taunt us with tritheism, must be Nay, do you number, I have said all
told that we confess One God not in about the Three, when I say, Father and
number, hut in nature. For what is Son and Holy Ghost. Not, as there
One in number is not really one, nor are two men, so are They two Gods for ;
single in nature; for instance, we call there here something ineffable, which
is
the world <me in number, but not one in cannot be jiut into words, that there
nature, for we divide it into its ele- should both be number in Three, and nut
ments and man again is one in number,
;
number. For see if there does not seem
but compounded of body and soul. If to be number. Father and Son and
then we say that G d is in nature one, Holy Spirit, a Trinity. If Three,
how do they impute number to us, who Three what .' number fails. Then
altogether banish it from that blessed God neither without number, nor is
is
and spiritual nature ? For number be- under number. They imply number,
. . .
longs to quantity, and number is con- only relatively to Each Other, not in
nected with matter, &c." Basil. Ep. Themselves." August, in Joan. 3!),
8, 2. "That which saveth us, is faith, 3 and 4. " We
say Three Persons,' as
'
but number has been devised to indirate many Latins of authority have said in
quantity .... We
pronounce Each of treating the subject, because they found
the Persons once, but when we would no more suitable way of declaring an
number Them up, we do not proceed by idea in words which they had without
an unlearned numeration to the notion words. Since the Father is not the
of a polytheism." (vid. the whole pas- Son, and the Son not the Father, and
" the Holy Ghost neither Father nor
sage,) ibid, de Sp. S. c. 18. Wliy
passing by the First Cause, does he Son, there are certainly Three ; but
[S. John] at once discourse to us of the when we ask, Three what ? we feel
Second ? We
will decline to speak of the great poverty of human language.
However, we say Tliree
'
'
first and second ;' for the Godhead
'
Persons,'
'
is higher than lunnbcr and succession not for ihe sake of saying that, but of
454 Our Lord's asking does not argue ignorance.
Disc. 4. And while such is the sense of these passages, those too
——III.
which speak humanly concerning the Saviour, admit of a
y-
religious meaning also. For with this end have we examined
\
vid.
inrr. 46.
them beforehand, that, if we should hear Him asking where
Lazarus is laid ', or when He asks on coming into the parts
^ ^ -^^
John 11, 01 '^sesarea, yV/iotn do men say that I am? or. How many
ox
MM ^oav<^s have ye ? and, What will
ye that I shall do unto you ?
16, 13. we may know, from what has been already said, the orthodox*
'
?in!
S6^S6 of passages, and may not stumble as Christ's
ttie
Ilot^i'
^^° ^^^^' ^°®^ -"^^^ f°^' certain ask from ignorance but it is ;
^
they still persist on account of His asking, then they must
be told that in the Godhead indeed ignorance is not, but to ^•'\
not saying nothing." de Trin. v. 10. I have not made three Suns, but named
" one so many times .... A trine numera-
Unity is not number, but is itself the
principle of all things." Ambros. de tion then does not make number, which
Fid. i. n. 19. "That is truly one, in they rather run into, who make some
which there is no number, nothing in It ditference between the Three." Boeth.
beyond That which is. There is no
. . . Trin. unus Deus, p. 959. The last re-
diversity in It, no plurality from di- mark is found in Naz. Orat. 31, 18.
versify, no multitude from accident?, Many of these passages are taken from
and therefore not number .... but Thomassin de Trin. IJ.
Unity only. For when God is thrice b Petavius refers to this
passage in
repeated, and Father, Son, and Holy proof that S. Athanasius did not in his
Ghost is named, three Unities do not real judgment consider our Lord ig-
make plurality of number in Him norant, but went on to admit it in ar-
which They are .... This repetition of gument after having lirst given his own
Unities is itci-ation rather than nu- real opinion, vid. p. 4(>4, note f.
and was aware of what was in the heart of each, and of what John 2,
teas in man, and, what is greater, alone knows the Father W'
'
and says, I in the Father and the Father in Me. Therefore ^. 38.
this is plain to every one, that the flesh indeed is ignorant, but
the Word Himself, considered as the Word
\ knows all things ^v^dyos
even before they come to be. For did not, when He He
became man, cease to be God"; nor, whereas He is God does '
p-2iti,
note k.
He shrink from what is man's ; perish the thought ; but
rather, being God, He has taken to Him the flesb, and being
in the flesh makes the flesh God ^. For as He asked questions *
Oeonotf:
our ignorance, He
might vouchsafe to us the knowledge
of His own
only and true Father, and of Himself sent
because of us for the salvation of all, than which no grace
could be greater.
6. When
then the Saviour uses the words which they
allege in their defence. Power is given to Me, and. Glorify
Thy Son, and Peter says. Power is given unto Him, we
understand all these passages in the same sense, that hu-
manly because of the body He says all this. For though
He had no need, nevertheless He is said to have received
what He received humanly, that on the other hand, inas-
much Lord has received, and the grant is lodged
as the
with Him, the grace may remain sure. For while mere man
receives, he is liable to lose again, (as was shewn in the case
of Adam, for he received and he lost *,) but that the grace *
p. s?!^-
says, Glorify Me, who glorifies others, to shew that He hath (Trai,
tlon'an
^e^^mc flesh, (and for this He did become,) who does not
internal see that it what He saj's that He received, when
follows, that
vid.supr.
He became flesh, that He mentions, not for His own sake,
P-357, but for the flesh? for to it, in which He was speaking,
note e. •
r o'
i i -p •
6
eeoTToi-n- pertained the gifts given through Him from the Father.
"''
7. But let us see what He asked, and what the things alto-
1 Cor. 8, Il/in ; and there is One Lord hy irhom are all And
1)1/ things.
when He asked glory. He was as He is, the Lord of glory ;
I Cor. 2, as Paul says. If they had known it, they would not have
"•
crucified the Lord of glory ; for He had that glory which
lie received what lie had before. 457
and from His remitting sins, saying to the paralytic, and to the ^^^^^-
"»
woman who washed His feet. Thy sins be forgiven thee ; and Luke 7,
^'^•
from His both raising the dead, and repairing the first nature
of the blind, granting to him to see. And all this He did,
not waiting
^ till He should receive, but being jwssessed of Is. 9, fi.
Sept.
power. i^ovfftaT-
as
might henceforward upon earth have power against devils,
having become partakers of a divine nature and in heaven, ;
by Peter, receiving from God Jionour and glory, Angels being 22.
^^•
made subject wnto Him, has this meaning; for as He ^-
so He
inquired humanly, and raised Lazarus divinely, y^is,
received is Him
humanly, but the subjection of
spoken of ^2*4' r.' 2.
9. Cease then, ye abhorred of God and degrade not the ', j^, j;/o,.t"
2 H
1
^i?^-
111.
„„^
edixnTa
458 He icas
and
in the flesh,
called Lazarus,
we
true flesh in the Word.
things are ascribed to the Saviour in the Gospel, let us, con-
siderins: the nature of what is said and that they are foreign
to God, not impute them to the Word's Godhead, but to His
manhood. For though the Word
yet to the beeame flesh,
flesh are the affections proper ; and though the flesh is
T^Tc^y^ grace and the power. He did then the Father's works
through the flesh ;
and as truly contrariwise were the af-
fections of the flesh displayed in Him for ; instance, He
inquired and He raised His Mother,
Lazarus, He chid"^
John 2,
saying, My hour is not pet come, and then at once He made
the water wine. For He was Yery God in the flesh, and He
was true flesh in the Word. Therefore from His works Hel
^
revealed both Himself as Son of God, and His own Father,
and from the affections of the flesh He shewed that He bore
a true body, and that it was proper to Him. V
c
€7re'irA77TT€ ;
and SO iTreTi/xr^ae, iii.IC, n. 7- who thinks S. Mary de-
sired to drink of His cup
Chrysost. in loc. Joann. and Theophyl. others that
;
ws SecTTfiTrjs e'lriTi/xo, Theodor. Eran. ii. their entertainerwas poor, and that she
p. 106. eVrpeVei, Anon. ap.
Corder. Cat. wished to befriend him. Nothing can
in loc. fieficpeTai, Alter Anon. ibid, be argued from S. Athan.'s particular
iizniixa oiiK arifxa^cov aWaSiopOov/j.fvos, word here commented on how he would
Euthym. in loc. ovk eneTrXri^^v, Pseudo- have taken the passage. That the tone
Justin. Quaest. ad Orthod. 136. It is of our Lord's words is indeed (judg-
remarkable that Athan. dwells on these ing humanly and speaking humanly)
words as implying our Lord's humanity, cold and distant, is a simple fact, but
(i.
e. because Christ appeared to decline it may be explained variously. It is
a miracle,) when one reason assigned observable that e7rnrA.TjTTei and iiriTi/xS
for them by the Fathers is that He are the words used (infr. p. 47?! "Ote a.)
wished, in the words ri iJ.oi Kai croi, to for our Lord's treatment of His own
remind S. Mary that He was the Son of sacred body. But they are very vague
God and must be "about His Father's words, and have a strong meaning or
business."
" intem- as the case may be.
RepeUens ejus not,
pestivam festinationem," Iren. Haer.
CHAPTEE XXYIII.
TEXTS explained; eleventhly, mark xiii. 32, and
LUKE ii. 52.
against the context. Our Lord said He was ignorant of the Day, by reason
of His human nature from
sjnnpathy with man. If the Holy Spirit knows
;
the Day, therefore the Son knows; if the Son knows the Father, therefore
He knows the Day ;
If He has aU that is the Father's, therefore know-
ledge of the Day if in the Father,
; He knows the Day in the Father; if
the Father's Image, He knows the Day if He created and upholds all
;
things. He knows the Day when they will cease to be. He knows not, as
representing us, argued from Matt. 24, 42. As He asked about Lazarus's
grave, &c. yet knew, so He knows as S. Paul says, "whether in the body I
;
know not," &c. yet knew, so He knows. He said He knew not for our
profit, that we be not curious, (as in Acts 1, 7. where on the contraiy He
did not say He knew not that we be not secure and slothful. As the
;)
Almighty asks of Adam and of Cain, yet knew, so the Son knows. Again,
He advanced in Wisdom also as man, else He made Angels perfect before
Himself. He advanced, in that the Godhead was manifested in Him \
more fully as time went on.
But of and that hour knoiceth no man, neither the Mark 1:5,
that day
"' '
themselves with it, see in them the giants^ again fighting f' 2.
'
2
yiyav-
a S. Basil takes the words oi>5' 6 i/i^s, 30, 10. Trenaeus seems to adopt "^"f"'
S.
€1 ;u^ 6 TTOTTjp, to mean, "nor does the same wlien he says, "The Sou ^'^^°"'''
the Son know, except the Father was not ashamed to refer the know- ''^"'l'.
knows," or "nor would the Son but ledge of tliat day to the Father ;" Hser.
'''
2 h2
460 0}(r Lord Jnicw the lad day, for He described its antecedents.
'O^^^-
III.
arainst God. For the Lord of heaven and earth,'J by whom
. . .
all things were made, has to litigate before them about day
and hour and the Word who knows all things, is accused
;
'
6(>iU(5s -vYork ? And
the very context of the passage shews that
^
the Son of God knows that hour and that day, though the
Arians fall headlong in their ignorance. For after saying,
nor the Son, He
relates to the disciples the approaches of
" This and that
the day, saying, shall be, and then the end."
But He who speaks of the antecedents of the day, knows
should be. And as any one, who, by pointing out a house way of
or city to those who were ignorant of it, gave an account of the
object,) so the
Lord saying what shall precede that day and.
that hour, knows exactly, not is ignorant, when the hour and
the day are at hand.
§. 43. 2. Now why knew. He did not tell
it was that, though He
irepiep-
jj^^ disciplcs plainly at that time, no one may be curious"
p. 420, where He has been silent for icho hath hnown the mind of ;
"° ^
the Lord, or who hath been His counsellor ? but wh}', though
'^'
"
'
.34. He knew. He said, no, not the Son hnoics, this I think none of
the faithful is ignorant,
'O viz. that He made this as those other
3 ixoLT- declarations as man by reason of the flesh. For this as
the heaven was made by Him, nor when He was with the Jt^J^^-
\ V \ 111
Father Himself, the Word disposinrj all things, nor before p~~^
He became man did He say it, but when the Word bccatiie 27. Sept.
"
because of the flesh which is ignorant^ to say I know not," '
p- 4G9,
I* 1
^§\6yos must the "Word know, considered as the WordS from whom
e.TTi
2
the Spirit receives^; and next by His silence about the
p. 248. Spirit,
Sera;), i. He made it clear, that He said of His human ministry^, no,
20 fin.
•* not the Son.
XeLTovp
yiai 4. And
a proof of it is this that, when He had spoken ;
humanly'* No, not the Son knows, He yet shews that divinely
He knew all things. For that Son whom He declares not
And so Atban. ad Scrap, ii. 9. it was put to me, that our Lord Jesus
'-'
S. Basil on the question being asked him Christ was ignorant as He was man,
by S. Ampbilochius, says that he shall (secundum hominem.) But now not
give him the answer he had '' heard only doI not presume to say so, but I
from a boy from tlie fathers," but even anathematize my former opinion
which was more fitted for pious Chris- expressed on this point, because it may
tians than for cavillers, and that is, that not be said, that the Lord of the Pro-
" our Lord
says many things to men phets was ignorant even as He was
in His human aspect ; as ' Give me to man." ap. Sirm. t. i. p. 210. A sub-
drink,' yet He who asked was not
. . . division also of the Eutychians were
flesh without a soul, but Godhead using called by the name of Agnoetse from
flesh which had one." Ep. 236, 1. He their holding that our Lord was
ignorant
"
goes on to suggest another explanation of the day of judgment.
They said,"
which has been mentioned p. 459, note a. " that He was
says Leontiui!, ignorant
And S. Cyril, " Let them then [the of it, as we say that He underwent
Arians] strip the Word openly of the toil." de Sect. 5. circ. fin. Felix of
flesh and what it implies, and destroy Urgela held the same doctrine accord-
outright the whole Economy, and then ing to Agobard's testimony, as contained
they will clearly see the Son as God or, ; p. 466", note g. The Ed. Ben. observes
if they shudder at this as impious and on the text, that the assertion of our
absurd, why blush they at the conditions Lord's ignorance " seems to have been
of the manhood, and determine to find condemned in no one in ancient times,
fault with what especially befits the unless joined to other error." And Pe-
economy of the flesh ?" Trin. pp. 023, tavius, after drawing out the authorities
4. vid. also Thes. p. 220 " As He sub- for and against it, " Of these two
says,
mitted as man to hunger and thirst, so opinions, the latter, which is now re-
.... to be ignorant." p. 221. vid. also ceived both by custom and by ihe
Greg. Naz. Orat. 30, 15. Theodoret agreement of divines, is deservedly pre-
expresses the same opinion very strongly, ferred to the former. For it is more
speaking of a gradual revelation to the agreeable to Christ's dignity, and more
manhood from the Godhead, but in an befitting His character and office of
argument where it was to his point to Mediator and Head, that is. Fountain
do so in Anath.
;
4. t. v. p. 23. ed. Schutze. ofall grace and wisdom, and moreover
Theodore of Mopsuestia also speaks of Judge, who is concerned in know-
of a revelation made by the Word, ap, ing the time fixed for exercising that
Leont. c. Nest. (Canis. i. p. 579.) function. In consequence, the former
^ in his
Leporius, Retractation, opinion, though formerly it received the
which S. Augustine subscribed, writes, countenance of some men of high emi-
" That in this respect also leave was afterwards marked
I may nence, as a
nothing to be cause of suspicion to any heresy." Licarn. xi. 1. §. 15.
one, 1 then said, nay I answered when
// the Father not ignorant, the Son not ignorant. 463
who knows the Father, much more knows the whole history' of
'
"^^ ^^<"'
the creation and in that whole, its end. And if alread}' the
;
the Son. Therefore, He, being the Framer of the universe, ^^^^ J'
knows of what nature, and of what magnitude, and with what
limits, the Father has willed it to be made and in the how
;
^
much and how far is included its period ^ And again, if all that "-^-^"i^
. . .
Jobn \l>,
is the Father's, is the Son's, (and this He Himself has said,) 15.
for if He who knows the Father knows not the day nor the
p. 252,
Lord has said '
but let us, who love Christ and bear Christ
;
2
^'^*^^^^ ^^s'' know that the Word, not as ignorant, considered
xp'Ir'ro-
<t>6poL as Word^ has said I know not, for He knows, bvit as shewino'
eVTi."^"^ ^^^ manhood ^,
in that to be ignorant is
proper to man, and
f It is a
question to be decided, fostered by such words as oIkovoplmuis,
whether our Lord speaks of actual ig- which, in respect of this very text, is used
norance in His human Mind, or of by S. Basil to denote both our Lord's
the natural ignorance of that Mind Incarnation, Ep. 230", 1 fin. and His
considered as human ignorance in or
; gracious accommodation of Himself and
ex natura or, whicli comes to the same
; His truth, Ep. 8, G. and with the Hke va-
tiling, whetlier He spoke of a real ig- riety of meaning, with reference to the
norance, or of an economical or pro- same text, by Cyril. Trin. p. C23. and
fessed ignorance, in a certain view of Tliesaur. p. 224. (And the word dispen-
His incarnation or office, as when He satio in like manner, Ben. note on Hil.
asked, "How many loaves have ye?" X. 8.) In the latter Ep. S. Basil suggests
when " He Himself knew
what He that our Lord " economizes by a feigned
would do," or as He is called sin, ignorance." §.fi. And S. Cyril, in The-
though sinless. Thus it has been no- saur. 1. c. in spite of his strong language
ticed, supra p. 359, note f. that Ath. " The Son knows
quoted above, all
seems to make His infirmities altogether things, though economically He says
but imputative, not real, as if shew- He is ignorant of something." Thesaur.
ing that the subject had not in his day p. 224. And even in de Trin. vi. he
been thoroughly worked out. In like seems to recognise the distinction laid
manner S. Hilary, who, if the passage down just now between the natural and
be genuine, states so clearly our Lord's actual state of our Lord's humanity ;
" God would
ignorance, de Trin. ix. fin. yet, as not make it known even
Petavius observes, seems elsewhere to the Son Himself, were he a mere
to deny to Him those very aftections man upon earth, as they say, and not
of the flesh to which he has there having it in His nature to be God."
paralleled it. And this view of Athan.'s p. C2ij. And S. Hdary arguing that
meaning is favoured by the turn of He must as man knovv the day of judg-
his expressions. He says such a de- ment, His coming is as man, says,
for
" that " Since
fectbelongs to human nature He
is Himself a sacrament,
whose property it is to be ignorant;" let us see whether He be
" ignorant in
43. that
§. since He was made man. the things which He knows not. For
He not ashamed, because of the flesh
is if in the other
resjiects a profession of
which is ignorant, to say I know not ;' " '
which implied surely knowledge in His S. Austin follows him, saying, Hoc
human nature. The reference to the nescit quod nescienter facit. Trin. i. 23.
parallel of S. Paid's professed ignorance Pope Gregory says that the text " is
when He really knew, §. 47- leads us to most certainly to be referred to the Son
the same suspicion. And so "for our not as He is Head, but as to His
body
ju/q/?/!, as I think, did He this." 50. §48— which we are." Ep. x. 30. And S.
The natural want of precision on su(;h Ambrose distinctly; "The Son which
questions in the early ages was shewn or took on Him the flesli, assumed our
He said lie icas 'i(jnorunt to represent us tncn loho are ignorant. 465
that He had put on a flesh that was ignorant \ being in which, ^^^f '!',
He said according to the flesh, I know not. And for this '"4(^9^ ,
reason, after saying, No not the Son knows, and mentioning the r. 1.
ignorance of the men in Noe's day, immediately He added,
" Watch
therefore, for ye knoiv not in ichat hour your Matt. 24,
did not know, but He who brought the flood (and it was the
Saviour Himself) knew the day and the hour, in which He
opened the windows of heaven, and broke up the fountains
of the great deep, and said to Noe, Come thou and all thy house Gen. 7,
Noe's time, and He did know the day of the flood, therefore He
knows also the day of His own appearing. Moreover, after ^. 46.
narrating the parable of the Virgins, again He shews more S/xolcco-iu
^
2
clearly who they are who are ignorant of the day and the
hour, saying, Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor Matt.
the hour. He who said shortly before, No one knoweth, no~ '
" I
not the Son, now sa3's not know not," but ye know not.
In like manner then, when His disciples asked about the
end, suitably said He then, no, nor the Son, according to the
aft'ections, so as to say that lie knew Matth. Horn. 77i ^- Theodoret, how-
not with our ignorance not that lie
; ever, but in controversy, is very severe
was ignorant of any thing Himself, for, on the principle of Economy. "If He
though He seemed to be man in truth of knew the day, and wishing to conceal
body, yet He was the life and light, and it, said He was ignorant, see what a
virtue went out of Him, &c." dc fid. blasphemy is the result. Truth tells an
V. 222. And so Caesarius, Qu. 2(t. and untruth." 1, c. pp. 23, 4.
Photius Epp. p. 36(j. Chrysost. in
466 Other instances in Script lO'eo/our Lord's economical ignorance.
;
;
man ^. If however
for ignorance is proper to
''
who was on His way to raise him, and knew whence He
should recall Lazarus's soul and it was a greater thing to
;
know where the soul was, than to know where the body lay ;
Luke 10 ^0^' -^^ ^'^^ Tinoiceth the Son, saith He, but the Father, neither
^--
the Father but the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son shall
reveal Him. But
through the Son is revealed the know-
if
ledge both of the Father and the Son, there is no room for
doubting that the Lord who asked, having first revealed it to
Peter from the Father, next asked humanly in order to ;
g The mode in which Athan. here to have been ignorant of the sepulchre
expresses himself, is as if he did not when He said to his sisters,
of Lazarus,
ascribe ignorance literally, but apparent 'Where have ye laid him?' and was
ignorance, to our Lord's soul, vid. supr. truly ignorant of the day of judgment ;
p. 4G4. note f;
not certainly in the and was truly ignorant what the two
broad sense in which heretics have done disciples were saying, as they walked
so. As Leontius, e.g. reports of Theo- by the way, of what had been done at
dore of Mopsuestia, that he considered Jerusalem and was truly ignorant
;
Christ "to be ignorant so far, as not to whether He was more loved by Peter
know, when He was tempted, who than by tlie other disciples, when He
tempted Him ;" contr. Nest. iii. (Canis. said, 'Simon Pefer, Lovest thou ^le
t. i.
p. 579 ) and Agobard of Felix the more than these ?'" B. P. t. !). p. 1 177.
" Our Lord The Agnoetse have been noticed just
Adoptionist that he held
Jesus Christ according to the flesh truly above.
If S. Paul said
'
I know not^ yet kneic, much more our Lord. 467
irapavo-
(xiav, p.
that the Prophets and the other ministers of the "Word know
401,
neither what they do nor concerning what they announce. note f.
the spiritalis vis qua constat prophetia ;" and there remained no strength in them;
and he considers Adam's sleep as an others exceedingly trembled and quaked ;
" This is bone of some were torn with a kind of convulsive
ecstacy, and my bone,
&c." as his prophecy, de Anim. 21. motion in every part of their bodies, and
And a contemporary writer in Eusebius, that so violently, that often four or five
" had
says that Montanus suddenly a persons could not hold one of them."
seizure and ecstacy, and was in a trans- Southey's Wesley, vol. i.
p. 271. And
" She leaned
port, and began to speak and to utter so the French Prophets ;
an unknown language, ^€vo(pcoue7v, pro- back in her chair, and had strong work-
jihesying beside the custom of the ings in her breast, and uttered deep sighs.
Church, received
as by tradition and Her head, and her hands, and by turns
succession from antiquity." Hist. v. 1 fi. every part other body, v\'ere atTected with
Epiphanius too, noticing the failure of convulsive motions, &c." ibid. p. 279.
Maximilla's prophecies, sa3's, " What- And so of the Irvinuite prophetesses,
Mr. Pilkington says, " The Tongue
''
ever the prophets have said, they spoke . .
with understanding, following the burst forth .... with an astonishing and
sense." Hser. 48. p. 403. And he terrible crash, so suddenly and in such
" short sentences, that I seldom recovered
proceeds to speak of their settled
" the shock before the English commenced
mind," and their self-possession,"
and their not being " carried away as .... Her whole frame was in violent
if in ecstacy," which gained them the agitation, but principally the body from
name of "Seers;" and he instances the hips to the shoulders, which worked
Moses, Isaiah, Ezekicl, and Daniel. with a lateral motion, &c." The Un-
And so S. Cyril of the True Spirit : known Tongues, pp. 5 and 17. "With
" His an appearance of surjirise he asked me
coming is gentle, the perception
of Him is fragrant, most light is His what 1 intended by it ? I replied, It '
gleam forth before His coming, &c." mean.' How can you, Sir, under-
'
but when the Lord says, " I know not," they say that He does
not know. For if since Christ was within him, Paul knew
that of which he says, / know not, does not much more
"
Christ Himself know, though he say, " I know not ? The
Apostle then, the Lord revealing it to him, knew what
happened for on this account he says, I knew a man in
;
CJirist and knowing the man, he knew also how the man
;
the sons of the Prophets thought that Elias was cast iipon
one of the mountains by the Spirit, he knowing from the
first what he had seen, tried to persuade them but when ;
how. And yet Paul says / knoiv not, for these two reasons,
as I think at least, one, as he has said himself, lest because
of the abundance of the revelations any one should think of
him beyond what he saw ;
the other, because, our Saviour
concerning the day and the hour He was not willing to say /
^
"
according to His Divine nature, I know," but after the flesh, \
and then either He should have to pain the disciples by not '"• '•
inquiries.
10. And so in the Acts of the Apostles it is written, when
He went upon the Angels, ascending as man, and carrying
the Father hath jjut in Mis own power. And He did not
then say, No, not the Son, as He said before humanly, but.
It is not for you to know. For now the flesh had risen and
put ofi'its mortality and been made God^ and no longer did ; -eeowoiT,-
effecting, o4Kovo;uw;', something profitable hinders them asking .... for how can
and good." iljid. And again, after the Son be ignorant of the day?"
" Often little
stating that there was an objection, and Theophyl. in loc. i\Iatt.
paralleling His words
with His question children see their fathers holding some-
to S. Philip about the loaves, he says, thing in their hands, and ask for it, but
Knowing as God the Word, He can,
"
they will not give it. Then the children
" It is At length the
as man, be ignorant." p. 22;i. cry as not receiving it.
not a sign of ignorance, but of wisdom, fathers hide what they have got and shew
for it was inexpedient that we should their empty hands to their children,
know it." Ambros. de Fid. v. 209. S. and so stop their crying For our
Chrysostom seems to say the same, de- profit hatli He hid it." ibid, in loc.
" For thee He is ignorant of
nying that the Son was ignorant,
in ^larc.
" Had the hour and day of judgment, though
Matt. 24, :^(>. AndTheophylact,
He said, '1 know, but 1 will not tell nothing is hid from tlie Very Wisdom
you,' they had been
cast down, as if .... But He economizes tliis because
despised by Him but now in saying
;
of thy infirmity, &c." Basil. Ep. H, 6.
'
not the Son but the Father only,' He
470 Various ends answered by our Lord's jjro/essed ignorance.
what He said, "I know but it is not for you to know; for it
was your sakes that sitting also on the mount I said accord-
for
ing to the flesh, No, not the Son knoiceth," for the profit of you
and all. For it is profitable to you to hear so much both of the
Angels and of the Son, because of the deceivers which shall
be afterwards that though devils should be transfigured as
;
concealed from us, (for in the end of all is the end of each,
and in the end of each the end of all is comprehended,) that,
whereas uncertain and always in prospect, we may
it is
^jj
advance day by day as if summoned, reaching forward to the
Phil. 3,
things before us and forgetting the things behind. For who,
knowing the day of the end, would not be dilatory with the
interval? but if ignorant, would not be ready da}' by
doth come; and, In such an hour as i/e think not, the Son Chap.
XXVIII.
—
...
'
. 12,
ignorance has He said this for in saying it, He wishes that
;
40.
not but I, the Lord, know when I come, though the Arians
;
do not wait for Me, who am the "Word of the Father." The §. 50.
Lord then \ knowing what is good for us beyond ourselves, '
j5 tj.\v
"'"''•
thus secured the disciples; and they, being thus taught, set
right those of Thessalonica when likely on this point to run \id.
• . 2Thes.
into error. 2 i
"What then say you to this ? for if you think Him ignorant
and therefore have asked, you are already of the party of
to
is their bold
the Manichees, for this thought but if, fearing ;
" This seems taken from Origen. having leaves, He came, if haply He
"He who knows what is in the heart might find, ik.c." M&r\i 11, 13. "Simon,
of men, Christ Jesus, as He has taught lovest thou Me?" John 21, 15. vid.
us in the Gospel of John, asks, yet is Ambros. de Fid. v. c. 17. Chrys.
not ignorant. But since He has now in Matt. Horn. 77. 3. Greg. Epp. x.
taken on Him man. He adopts all that 39. Vid. also the instances supr. §. 37.
is man's, and among them the asking Other passages may be added, sucli as
questions. Nor is it strange that the Gen. 22, 12. vid. Berti Opp. t. 3.
Saviour should do so, since the very p. 42. But the difficulty of the passage
God of all, accommodating Himself to lies in its signifying that there is a
the habits of man, as a father might to sense in which the Father knows what
his son, inquires, for instance, Adam,
'
the Son knows not. Petavius, after S.
where art thou?' and 'Where is Abel Augustine, meets this by explaining it
thy brother?'" in Matt. t. 10. §. 14. to mean that our Lord, as sent from
vid. also Pope Gregory and Chrysost. the Father on a mission, was not to
infr. reveal all things, but observed a silence
Chrysostom, S. Ambrose, and
° S. and professed an ignorance on those
Pope Gregory, in addition to the in- points which it was not good for His
" I will brethren to know. As ^lediator and
stances in the text, refer to go
down now, and see ivhether they have Prophet He was ignorant. He refers
(lone, &c. and if not, I will knoxv." in illustration of this view to such texts
Gen. 18, 21. "The Lord came down as, 'I have not spoken of Myself, but
/o see the city and the tower, &c." Gen. the Father which sent Ale, He gave
11,5.
" God looked down from heaven Me commandment wAa/ I should say
upon the children of men io see, &c." and should speak .... irAaAsoewr
!/•/(«/ 1
" J( I speak therefore, even as the Father
Ps. 53, 3. may be they will re-
verence My Son." Matt. 21, .37. Luko said unto Ale, so 1 speak." John 12,
Disc. J^ whom God then inquired, that same Son who now is clad
in flesh, inquires of the disciples as man ? unless forsooth,
'
p. 189, havinff become Manichees, you are williuo: to blame' the
note a. .
question then put to Adam, and all that you may give full
- "
veaviev-
pla}^ to your perverseness.
Dt'or.is'
^^' ^^^ being exposed on all sides, you still make a
^'^
from the words of Luke, which are appropriately
f'*^" h whispering^
'^
roveopv- said,
but ill understood by you^. And what is this, we must
'
Deer 'le
^^^^®' *^^^ ^° ^^^o their corrupt meaning may be shewn.
§. 51.
Now Luke says, And Jesus advanced in icisdom and stature,
Luke 2, and in grace with God and man. This then is the passage,
"
p. 341, and since they stumble in it, we are compelled to ask them,
^® ^'^^ Pharisees and the Sadducees, of the person
5
SieAfia - concerning
P-^vT), whom Luke speaks. And the case stands thus. Is Jesus
Christ man, as all other men, or is He God, bearing flesh?
'
r']
*
'^°"'i'^'
If then He is an ordinary* man as the rest, then let Him, as
note q'.
a man, advance; this however is the sentiment of Samosatene,
which virtually indeed you entertain also, though in name you
7 aaoKa dcnv it bccauso of men. But if He be God bearino: flesh ^, as
(popoiu
jjg truly is, and the Word became flesh, and being God
^
irpoKo-
descended upon earth, what advance^ had He who existed
"^^
equal to God ? or how had the Son increase, being ever in
the Father ? For if He who was ever in the Father, advanced,
what, I ask, is there beyond the Father from which His ad-
vance might be made ? Next it is suitable here to repeat what
was said upon the point of His receiving and being glorified,
'^vid If He advanced^ when He became man, it is plain that,
108,
before He became man, He was imperfect^; and rather the
j3.
note 1.
flesh became to Him a cause of perfection, than He to the
vi(!.supr,
§. 30.
flesh. And again, Word, He advances, what
if, as being the
Chat. IV.
jj^^g jjg become than Word and Wisdom and Son
more to
and God's power ? For the Word is all these, of which if one
can any how partake as it were one ray, such a man becomes
all-perfect among men, and equal to Angels. For Angels,
and Archangels, and Dominions, and all the Powers, and
Thrones, as partaking the Word, behold aiwaj's the face of
His Father. How then does He who to others supplies
perfection. Himself advance later than they ? For Angels
1"
7e; eo-ij/ even ministered to His human birth'", and the passage from
Luke comes later than the ministration of the Angels. How
TheWordftvhocoiildnotadvanceJiumhled HimselfthatwemigJdAlZ
then at all can it even come into thought of man ? or how Chap.
did Wisdom advance in wisdom ? or how did lie who to ^.iL^LHI*
what was before him. Por each had room for advancins:, '^'^'' ^^t^-
looking to the step before him. But the Son of God, who is l^l ^ept.
One and Only, what room had He for reachinor forward ? for all ^'^^•
things advance by looking atHim; and He, being One and Only, 13.
nothing else than His taking our flesh. It was not then s'l ^(^^or
the Word, considered as the Word % who advanced, who is ^°"^'^
1).291,
perfect from the perfect Pather ^ who needs nothing, naj^ note 1.'
also said to advance, since advance belongs to man ''. Hence p- •'^31,
note p.
"
vid,
P It is the doctrine of the Church babes. For in consequence of it, when ^crm.
that Christ, as man, was perfect in they are troubled witli irratiouiil emo- ,. J'
^
knowledge from tlie first, as if ig- tions,no reason, noconinuind, but pain ^'"" '"'
norance were hardly separable from sometimes and tlie alarm of pain restrains
sin, and were the direct consequence or them, &c." de Pecc. Mir. ii. 4K. As
" Tliat
accompaniment of original sin. to tiie limits of Christ's perfect know-
" I in no
ignorance," f-ays S. Austin, ledge as man, Petavius observes, that
wise can suppose existed in that Infant, we must considtr "that tlie soul of
in whom the Word was made flesh Clirist knew all things that are or ever
to dwell among us nor can I suppose
;
will be or ever have bten, but not what
that that infirmity of the mind belonged are only iw pone, not in" fact." Incarn.
to Clirist as a babe, wliich we see in .\i. 3, (i.
2 I
474 He advanced, while His Godhead tvas manifested in His flesh.
Disc.
Evangelist, speaking witli cautious exactness \
the lias
III.
»
mentioned stature in the advance but being Word and ;
p. 298,
note a. God He is not measured by stature, which belongs to bodies.
Of the body then is the advance for, it advancing, in it ;
2
(pavi- advanced also the manifestation^ of the Godhead to those
paxTis,
p. 443,
who saw it. And, as the Godhead was more and more
note g. revealed, by so much more man increase
did His grace as
before all men. He was carried to the Tem-
For as a child
r. 4.
^ q It is remarlcable, considering the Ambrose, Inrarn.71 — 74. Vid. however
p. 296, Ambr. de fid. as quoted supr.
r. 1.
tone of his statements in the present p. 463,
and in what follows note f. The Ed. Ben. in Ambr. Incarn.
cliapter, that here
Athan. should resolve our Lord's ad- considers the advancement of knowledge
"
vance in wisdom merely to its gradual spoken of to "be that of the scientia ex-
manifestation through the ilesh and it
; perimentalis alluded to in Hebr. 5, 8.
increases the proof that his statements which is one of the three kinds of know-
are not to be taken in the letter, and as ledge possessed by Christ as man. vid.
if fully brought out and settled. Naz. Berti Opp. t.3.p.41. Petavius, however,
ad Cled. 101. p. 86. omits the consideration of this know-
says the same, Ep.
which is the more remarkable since he ledge, which S. Thomas first denied in
is chiefly writing against the ApoUi- our Lord, and in his Summa ascribes to
narians who considered a (pavipoiais the Him, as lying beyond his province. "I>e
great end of our
Lord's coming; and hac lite neutram in partem pronuntiare
Cyril, c. Nest.
iii.
p. 8?. Theod. Hor. audeo. Hujusmodi enim qusestiones
V. 13. On the other hand, S.Epiphanius ad Scholas relegandse sunt ; de quibus
speaks of Him as growing in
wisdom as nihil apud antiquos liquidi ac definiti
man. Hter. 77- p. 1019—24. and S. reperitur." Incarn. xi. 4. §. 9.
He advanced ichen the manliood advanced in Hnn. 475
15. And if they urge, that The Word become flesh is called
^^"'*^*
Jesus, and refer to Him the term advanced, they must be told
'
that neither does this impair^ the Father's Light ^, which is the P- 244,
Son, but that it still shews that the Word has become man, 2
p. 424,
and bore true flesh. And as we said^ that He suffered in T*'*'^?:,,
p. 448.
•*
the flesh, and hungered in the flesh, and was fatigued in the
flesh, so also reasonably may He be said to have advanced
in the flesh for neither did the advance, such as we have
;
not, because of the Word which is with it. Neither then was
the advance the Word's, nor was the flesh Wisdom, but the
flesh became the body of Wisdom*. Therefore, as we have
^
p. 444,
note g.
.
" The Word
said he, advanced," but Jesus, by which name 9 ewAayu-
the Lord was called when He became man; so that the ad-/^'"' '^'
,
2 I 2
CHAPTER XXIX.
|
TEXTS EXPLAINED ; TWEI-FTHLY, MATTHEW XXvl. 39 ;
Arian Inferences are against the Eegula Fidei, as before. He wept and
the like, as man. Other texts prove Him God. God could not fear.
He feared because His flesh feared.
fTn n '
^^^^' ^^^^'' -^^^^' ^"^^^" sahachthani, that is, 3Iy God, My God,
35.'" why hast Thou forsaken 3Ie ? and He besought that the cup
John 12, but again I
j^-g^t pggg away.
Thus certainly it is written ;
Matt. 26, would ask vou, (for the same rejoinder must of necessity be
is mere* man,
Mark made to each of objections^) If the speaker
your
4
15, 34. |g^ j^-jj^ ^ggp and fear death, as being man ;
but if He is the
rj 304
Wordin flesh ', (forone must not be reluctant torepeat ,) whom
'
note s.
6
''"'^475 '
had He to fear being God ? or wherefore should He fear death,
!•• 1-
who was Himself Life, and was rescuing others from death ?
Luke 12,
^^ ^^^^ whereas He said, "Fear not him that kills the bodj^"
should He Himself fear him ? And how should He who said
Gen. 15, to Abraham, Fear not, for I am unth thee, and encouraged
against Pharaoh, and said to the son of Nun, Be
1 ; 2(:, 24.
]v/r g
Himself feel terror before
Josh'l,' strong, and of a good courage.
''
Herod and Pilate ? Further, He who succours others against
He could not reallt/ fear, icho was God. 477
fear what man doeth unto me,) did He fear governors, mor- p^ ^^^
tal men ? did He who Himself was come against death, feel 6.
say that Pie was terrified at death or hell, whom the keepers of
hell's gates saw and shuddered? But if, as you would hold, the
^ ^
s"!"".
note
P-
^^^'
1.
but when the Word became fesh, and became man, then is it
written that He said this, that is, humanly. Surely He of whom
was He who raised Lazarus from the dead,
this is written,
and made the water wine, and vouchsafed sight to the man
born blind, and said, / and My Father are one. If then ^o^^^ i^'
fore not from His divine works recognise the Word who is in Q^gj. j^
'
irreligion ? For they are given to see, how He who did the p. ^ofi,
works, is the same as He who shewed that His body was
^'^"^ "'
affected freely, as is our custom, but yes, but because He willed it; Jesus
He was vehement died, yes, but because He willed it.
'
(fve^pifj-riffaTo)
iu
478 As His Attributes shew Him to he God, so His terror to be man.
John 10, for, when they read I and Father are one, they violently
the
distort the sense, and separate the unity of the Father and
the Son but reading of His tears or sweat or sufierlngs,
;
again when they read, He tvept and the like, to say that these
are proper to the body; especially since on each side they
have an intelligible ground, viz. that this is written as of
God and that with reference to His manhood. For in the
incorporeal, the properties of body had not been, unless He
ip.241-3, liad taken a body corrujatible and mortaP; for mortal was
and i. Holy Mary, from whom was His body. "Wherefore of necessity
p. 375, -yvhen He was in a body suffering, and weeping, and toiling,
Serm. thcsc things which are proper to the flesh, are ascribed to
pj^^'j)*^
Him together with the body. If then He wept and was
Tertuii.
troubled, it was not the Word, considered as the Word^, who
'
Chr. c. wept and was troubled, but it was proper to the flesh and if ;
-
^ Koyos ^QQ jJq
besought that the cup might pass away, it was not the
Godhead that was in terror, but this affection too was proper
to the manhood.
3. And that the words Whi/ hast Thou forsaken Me ? are Chap,
He —
. XXIX.
His, according to the foregoing explanations ; though '-
man, and these things are done and said as from a man, that
He might Himself lighten^ these very sufferings of the flesh, pp.448, '
and free it from them^ Whence neither can the Lord be z 'and a.
'
forsaken by the Father, who is ever in the Father, both before P- ^^^'
-r-r
note g.
He spoke, and when He uttered these words. Nor is it
lawful to say that the Lord was in terror, at whom the keepers
of hell's gates shuddered^ and set open hell, and the graves-"' pp. 83.
did gape, and many bodies of the saints arose and appeared ^'^'
to their ownTherefore be every heretic dumb, nor ^ ^id-
people*.
. Matt 27
dare to ascribe terror to the Lord whom death, as a serpent, 50. 53.
'
the earth knowing its Lord" who spoke, straightway trembled, * Seo-Tro-
and the veil was rent, and the sun was hidden, and the rocks ^^q p-r. 2.
were torn asunder, and the graves, as I have said, did gape,
and the dead in them arose and, what is wonderful, they
;
who were then present and had before denied Him, then
seeing these signs, confessed that truli/ He was the Son of^^-
God^. 54.
*>
Vid. p. 303
init. p. 450, note b. him in the grave ; but the tear is proper
" Each form acts, in communion with to the man, and the life to the True
the other, those acts which belong Life. Human
poverty doth not feed
to itself; the Word working what is the thousands, nor doth Almighty
the Word's, and the flesh executing Power run to the fig-tree. Who is the
what is of the flesh. One of them is wearied from His journeying, and who
glorious in miracles, the other succumbs the giver of subsistence to the universe
to injuries. ... He is One and the Same, without effort.' What is that out-
truly Son of God, and truly Son of man streaming of glory, what that nailed
It belongs not to the same nature to
.
thing? What form is buffetted upon
weep with pity over a dead friend, and His passion, and what form is glori-
removing the stone of a fourtli-day tied from everlasting, &c." Nyssen.
contr. Eunom. iv. " When He
burial, to rouse him to life at the bidding ItJl. p.
of His voice; or to hang on the wood, wept dead Lazarus, He wept as a
and to turn day into night and make man; but He was more than a man,
the elements shudder or to be pierced
;
when He bade the dead shake off his
through with nails, and to open the gates fetters and come forth. He was seen
of paradisetothefaithof therobber,&c." as a man when He hung at the cross,
" Tlie flesh but as more than a man when He un-
Leo's Tome, (Ep. 28.) 4.
is of a passible nature, but the Word locked the tombs and raised the dead."
of an operative. . . Neither does the
. Ambros. Epist. i. 46. n. 7- vid. Hil.
human nature quicken Lazarus, nor Triii. x. 48. Also vid. Athan. Sent,
does the impassible Power weep over D. 'J tin, Serm. Maj. de Fid. 24.
480- He uilkcl as God what He deprecated as man.
p. 457, for therefore had He come but His was the willing, (for for it
;
r. 1.
He came,) but the terror belonged to the flesh. Wherefore
p. 458,
note c. as man He utters this speech also, and yet both were said by
the Same, to shew that He was God, willing in Himself, but
when He had become man, having a flesh that was in terror.
For the sake of this flesh He combined His own will with
human weakness*^, that destroying this affection He mig-ht in
that there are two wills in Clirist at &c. In another place he says still
variance with each other, as you con- more pointedly, " The ivill was of the
sider, and in opposition ; nor at all a Godhead alone; since the whole nature
will of flesh, or of passion, or evil of the Word was manifested in the
.
But, since it was perfect man that He
. second Adam's human form and visible
took on Him, that He might save him flesh." contr. Apoll. ii. 10. Yet else-
whole, and He is perfect in manhood, where he distinctly expresses the
therefore we call that sovereign dis- Catholic view " When He
;
says,
posal of His orders and commands by 'Father, if it be possible, &c.' and
the name of the Divine will in Christ,
'
the spirit is willing, &c.' He mentions
and we understand by human will the tiro wills, the one human, which belongs
intellectual soul's power of willing, given to the flesh, the other Divine, which
it after the image and likeness of God, belongs to God for the human, be-
;
and breathed into it by God, when it cause of the weakness of the flesh, prays
was made, by means of this power to against the passion, but His divine
prefer and to obey, and to do the divine will is ready." de Incarn. c. Ar. 21.
will and the divine orders. It then the S. Leo on the same passage begins like
soul of Christ was destitute of the power Athan. in the test vaguely, but ends, as
of reason, will, and preference, it is in At ban. 's second passage, distinctly;
" The first
not indeed after the image of God, nor request is one of infirmity,
consubstantial with our souls .... and the second of power; the first He asked
Christ cannot be called perfect in man- in our [character], the second in His
liood. Christ then, being in the form own. . The inferior will gave way to
. .
of Giid, has according to the Godhead the superior, &c." Serm. 56, 2. vid. a
that lordly will which is common in similar passage in Nyssen. Antirrh.
Father and Holy Ghost; and, as having adv. Apol. 32. vid. also 31. An ob-
taken the form of a servant. He does vious objection may be drawn from such
" "
also the will of His intellectual and passages, as if the will of the flesh
immaculate soul, &c Else if this were represented as contrary (vid. fore-
will be taken away, He will according going note) to the will of the Word.
to the Giidhead be subject, and fultil It is remarkable, as Petavius observes,
the Father's will as a servant .... as Incarn. ix. !). that Athan. compares
if there were two wiUs in the Godhead (as in the te.xt) the influence of our
of Father and of Son, the Father's that Lord's divine will on His human, in the
of a Lord, the Son's that of a servant." passage from the Incarn. quoted above,
to His rebuke of S. Peter,
" Get ttiee
Anast. Hodeg. i. p. 12.
d It is observable thjt, as elsewhere behinilM.', &c." vid.supr.p.477, note a.
we have seen Athan. speak of the na- But this is but an analogous instance,
ture of the Word, and of, not the na- not a direct resemblance. The whole
ture of man as united to Him, but of our Lord's prayer is offered by Him
of flesh, hnmanifi/, &c. (vid. p. 345, as man, because it is a prayer; the
note g.) so here, instead of speaking first part is not from Him as man, but
of two wills, he speaks of the Word's the second which corrects it is from Him
I/iheApodles an(l3Iartijrs, so surely our Lonl,disdainedto fear. 481
as God ;
but the former part is from the His own life? any one who will
for
sinless infirmity of our nature, the latter may kill himself.But He says not
from His human will expressing its ac- this, but how ? I have power to lay it
'
quiescence in His Father's, that is, in down in such sense that no one can do
His Divine Will. " His Will," says it against My will. ... I alone have
S. Greg. Naz. " was not contrary to the disposal of iSIy life,' which is not
God, being all deified, dewdiv oKov." true of us." And still more appositely
" It was
e This
might be taken as an illustra- Theophylact, open to Him
tion of the ut voluit supr. p. 243, note i. not to suffer, not to die for being with-
;
And so the expressions in the Evan- out sin. He was not subject to death,
" Into .... If then He had not been willing,
gelists, Thy hands I commend
ily Spirit," "He bowed the head," He had not bien crucified." in Hebr.
" fie " Since this
gave vp the ghost," are taken to 12, 2. punishment is
imply that His death was His free act. contained in the death of tlie body, that
vid. An)bros. in loc. Luc. Hieron. in tlie soul, because it has deserted God
loc. Matt, also Athan. Serm. Maj. de with its will, deserts the body against
Fid. 4 It is Catht)lic doctrine that its will .... the soul of the ^lediator
our Lord, as man, submitted to death proved, how utterly clear of tlie punish-
of His free will, and not as obeying ment of sin was its coming to the deal h
an express command of the Father, of the flesh, in that it did not desert
" on John but bin-ause it willed,
Who," S.
says Chrysosfom it unwillingly,
10, 18. "has not power to lay down and when it willed, and as it willed. . . .
482 Men die of necessity, our Lord of cJioice.
power. For man dies, not by his own power, but by neces-
sity of nature and against his Mall but the Lord, being ;
own nature remain mortal, but because of the Word who had
put it on, should abide incorruptible. For as He, having come
'
e'/xiMT)- in our body, was conformed^ to our condition, so we,
receiving
Him, partake of the immortality that is from Him.
§. 58. 5. Idle thenthe excuse for stumbling, and narrow the
is
^
3
5ta;ti€t- ever abide incorruptible, as a temple of the Word^. Had
Christ's enemies thus dwelt on these thoughts, and
.•is^'rl'l. recog-
"•
P;
474, nised the ecclesiastical scope as an anchor for the faith,
they would not have of the faith made shipwreck, nor been
who would fain recover them
so shameless as to resist those
from their fall, and to deem those as enemies who are
that after that work, in which He set raculo fuit,) because He was found
forth a figure of our sin, He forthwith dead." August, de Trin. iv. 16.
gave up the ghost. For crucified men ^ Thus ends the
exposition of texts,
483
whifih forms the body of these Orations. accorJance with the above remark. Chap.
remarkable that he ends as he " since XXIX.
It is they allege the divine oracles
began, with reference to the ecclesias- and force on them a misinterpretation
tical scope, or Regula Fidei, which according to their private sense, it be-
has so often come under our noiice, vid. comes necessary to meet them just so
p. 328, note 1. p. 341, note i. as if dis- far as to lay claim t othese passages,
tinctly to tell us, that Scripture did not and to shew that they bear an orthodox
so force its meaning on the individual sense, and that our opponents are in
as to dispense with an interpreter, and error." Again supr. p. 410. he says,
" What is the
as if his own deductions were not to be difficulty, that one must
viewed merely in their own logical need take such a view of such passages?"
power, great as that power often is, but He speaks of the trKOTrbs as a Kavwy or
as under the authority of the Catholic rule of interpretation, supr. §. 28. vid.
doctrines which they subserve. Vid. also §. 29 init. 35, c. Serap. ii. T, a.
p. 42(1, n. 14 fin. It is hardly a paradox Hence too he speaks of the " ecclesi-
to say that in patristical works of contro- astical sense," e. g. Orat. i. 44. Serap.
versy the conclusion in a certain sense iv. 15. and of the (ppov-rjfj.a Orat. ii. 31
proves the premisses. As then he here init. Deer. 17 fin. In ii. p. 32G. supr. he
" as makes the general or Church view of
speaks of the ecclesiastical scope
an anchor for the faith ;" so supr. Scripture supersede inquiry into the
p. 233. where the discussion of texts force of particular illustrations.
began, he introduces it by saying, in
CHAPTER XXX.
OBJECTIONS CONTINUED, AS IN CHAPTERS vii — X.
Whether the Son is begotten of the Father's will ? This virtuallj^ the same
as whether once He was not ? and itsed by the Arians to introduce the
latter question. The Regula Fidei answers it at once in the negati^'e by
contrary texts. The Arians follow the Valentinians in maintaining a
precedent will ;
which really is only exercised by God towards creatures.
Instances from Scripture. Inconsistency of Asterius. If the Son by
will, there must be another Word before Him. If God good, or exist,
is
Living Will, and has all titles which denote connaturality. That AviU
which the Father has to the Son, the Son has to the Father. The
Father wills the Son and the Son wiUs the Father.
^
p. 472, the hydra of Gentile fable, when its former serpents were
r. 5. hostile *"
and hateful
God^, as hydras'*, losing their life in
to
deoffTv
^Q objections which they advance, invent for themselves other
p. 424, questions Judaic and foolish, and new expedients, as if Truth
»
p.
P- 492 "^'sre
,
enemy, thereby to shew the rather that they are
their
note p. Christ's opponents in all things. After so many proofs against
*,
^'
00^* them, at which even the devil who is their father* had himself
'
p. 386,
r. 1. been abashed and gone back, again as from their perverse heart
they mutter forth other expedients, sometimes in whispers,
* This eh rwv iravrwu, &c. And the references
chapter is in a very different
stylefrom the foregoing portions of this are to the former Orations.
^
Book, and much more resembles the Beo/idxot. vid. p. 6, note n. p. 325,
former two ; not only in its subject and note d. Vid. Dissert, by Bucher on
the mode of treating it, but in the words the word in Acts 5, 39. ap. Thesaur.
introduced, e.g. e-n^Knrelpovat, ii^Lvoovcn, Theol. Phil. N. T. t. 2.
•yoyyv^avai, kuO' vfias, aToTrov,\i^il5toi',
This position of Avians a newform of their original statements. 485
" Be
sometimes with the drone "^
of gnats ;
it so," say they ;
^"^''•
" these and gain the victory in reasonings ^-
interpret places thus,
and proofs still you must say that the Son has been begotten
;
by the Father at His will and pleasure;" for thus they de-
ceive many, putting forward the will and the pleasure of God.
Now if any orthodox believer"^ were to say this in simplicity', '
airxoi-
The wicked are deceitful, and The u'ords of the xoiclied are >"• ''•
Prov,
deceit, even,though they but make signs^, for their heart is 12, 5, 6.
word, and by such clever language and specious evasion, they 5'p.*48i,
scatter again that irreligion of theirs in another way. For he '"• 2-
de fug. 2, 6. Naz. Orat. 27, 2. c. Nature draws to Itself those terms and
d S.
Ignatius speaks of our Lord as changes them." p. 2Ji5. Also de Mort.
" Son of God Ar. tin. Vid. supr. p. 17, note m. And
according to the will
(0e'A.i7^o)
and power of God." ad vid. Leont. coiitr. Nest. iii. 41.
(p. 581.
" God and Son He
Smyrn. 1. S. Justin as Canis.) here seems alluding to the
according to His will.
^ouAt)^." Tryph. Semi-Arians, Origen, and perhaps the
"
127. and begotten from the Father at earlier Fathers
f Of these
His will, dfXijffet." ibid. G\. and he says, Tatian had said BiKrtfiaTi
Swd/xei Kal l3ov\fj avTov. ibid. 128. S. Trpo-nrj^a o \uyos. Gent. 5. Tertullian
" had said, Ut primum voluit Dcus ca
Clement, issuing from the Father's
will itself quicker than light." Gent, edere, ipsum primum i)rotulitsernionem.
10 tin. S. Hippolytus, "Whom God adv.Prax.fi. Novatian, Ex. cjuo.quando
the Father, willing, 0ov\r)de\s, begat as ipse voluit, Sermo tiiins natus est.
He willed, is ij0e\-n<Tti'." contr. Noet. de Trin. ;il. And Constit. Apost. Thvirph
Iti. Origen, c/c df\-fifj.aroi. ap. Justin ad. alwvwv evSoKi'a -rov Trarphs -yfvvqOivra.
Menn. vid. also cum filius charitatis vii.41. Pseudo-Clem. GenuitDeusvolun-
etiam voluntatis. Ptriarch. iv. 28. tate iiraecedente. Recognit. iii. 10. Euse-
s In like manner he
says elsewhere, h'wis, KaTayvcLixriv KaXirpoaip^fftv ^ov\-rj-
" Had these Oth
expositions of theirs pro- b 9i6s' eKrris -rov irarpis ^ovXr]s koX
ceedtd from the orthodox, from sucli as Sui-a^ueoj. Dem. iv. .S. Arius, de\rifj.aTi
the great confessor Hosius, Maximinus, koI Pov\t} vnfffTri. ap Theod. Hist i. 4.
Piiiloironius, Eustathius, Julius, &c." p. 750. vid. also supr. p. DJ.
" Terms do not
Ep. Mg. 8. and supr.
486 It is opposed to the texts which speak of our Lord as God.
making but ;
they, where, I ask, did they find will or pleasure
"
precedent
*>"
to the Word of God, unless forsooth, leaving the
^ ^
Scriptures, they simulate the perverseness of Yalentinus ?
kcikS-
voiav
For Ptolemy the Yalentinian said that the Ingenerate had a
^
2 Si5o
^v- pair of attributes. Thought and Will, and first He thought
•yovs, Co-
And "
telier S so snpr. p. 30. by what iv. 8. Petavius refers in addition to
'
corr. ffv- Saint have they been taught at will?'" such passages as one just quoted from
That is, no one ever taught it in the S. Hilary, as speak of God as not in-
sense in which they explained it ; thus vidus, so as not to communicate Him-
he has just He who says at " '
self, since He was able. Si non
said, ])otuit,
will,'has the same meaning as he who infirmus ; si voluit, invidus. August,
says 'Once He was not.'" Again contr. Maxim, iii. 7.
" Since it is all one to '1
and 61 The
infr. say 'at KpoiyyovfjiivTiv fin.
will'and '
Once He was not,' let them antecedens voluntas has been men-
make up their minds to say '
Once He tioned in Recogn. Clem. supr. note f.
was not.'" p. 488; also pp. 492, 495. For Ptolemy vid. Epiph. Hser.
Certainly as the earlier Fathers had p. 215. The Catholics, who allowed
used the phrase, so those which came that our Lord was 6(\i]aei, explained
after Arius. Thus Nyssen in the pas- it as a avvSpo/j-os 6e\rjois, and not a
sage in contr. Eum. vii. referred to KpoTiyovixivri ; as Cj ril. Trin. ii. p. 5fi.
in the next note. And S. Hilary, And with the same meaning S. Am-
" Nativitatis
perfecta natura est, ut qui brose, nee voluntas ante Filium nee
ex substantia Dei natus est, etiam ex potestas. de 224.
Fid. And S.v.
consilio ejus et voluntate nascatur."
" His immediate
Gregory Nyssen,
Hilar. Syn. 37. The same father union, atx^aos awdcpeia, does not exclude
says, unitate Pattis et virtute. Psalm the Father's will, ^ov\7)<tiv, nor does
91, 8. and ut voluit, ut potuit, ut scit that will separate the Son from the
qui genuit. Trin. iii. 4. And he ad- Father." contr. Eunom. vii. p. 20f>, 7-
dresses Him as non invidum bonorum vid. the whole passage. The alternative
tuorum in Unigeniti tui nativitate. which these words, avv^pofxos and irpo
ibid. vi. 21 S. Basil too speaks of our
.
TjyovfiiVTj, expressed was this ; whether
Lord as avro^wy^v nal avTodyaOov, "from an act of Divine Purpose or Will
the quickening Fountain, the Father's took place before the Generation of
goodness, ayadSr-qros." contr. Eum. ii. the Son, or whether both the Will
25. And Csesarius calls Him 07^77^ and the Generation were eternal, as
TraTp6s. Qusest. 39. Vid. Ephrem. Syr. the Divine Nature was eternal. Hence
adv. Scrut. R. vi. 1. O.T. and note there. Bull says, with the view of exculpating
Maximus Taurin. says, that God is per Novatian, Cum Filius dicitur ex Patre,
omnipotentiam Pater Hom. de trad. quando ipse voluit, nasci, velle illud
Syrab. p. 270. ed. 1784. vid. also Patris seternum fuisse intelligendum."
Chryso'i. Serm. Gl. Ambros. de Fid. Defens. F. N. iii. 8. §. 8.
Asterius said that if all offsprings, therefore the First, by will. 487
precede the Word. For them then, let them rival the
doctrine
p^ 97^'
"ote h.
of Valentinus but we, when we read the divine discourses,
;
all His good pleasure ; and again, in the hundred^ and thirty-
Ps. ill,
others^ let Him, as others, be said "by will" to have come to eh tQ>v
•>
'^"^'^'^^
be, and Scripture shews that these are thus brought into being.
*
And Asterius, the hired pleader for the heresy, acquiesces,
5
^^iiya-
when he thus writes, " For if it be unworthy of the Framer of p^'^' P^-^ j^
will of God; and our own calling, as itself once not being,
butnow taking place afterwards^ is preceded by will, and, as ^jV^^""
Paul himself says again, has been made according to the good'^P^- '> ri.
488 But our Lord icas not one among many, hut their Creator.
pleasure of His icill. And what Moses relates, Let there he light,
Disc,
and Let the earth appear, and Let Us make man, is I think, ac-
cording to what has gone before \ significant of the will of the
^
s"P^:..
Agent. For things which once were not but happened after-
!«
iSouAeve- wards from external causes, these the Framer counsels* to
make but His proper Word begotten from Him by nature,
;
place times before the Son for counselling goes before things
;
7 ih Twv are all things ? For rather He too, as one among others^ is by
iravruu
^,-|-^ be a Son, as we too were made sons by the
bcgotton to
AYord of Truth and it rests, as was said, to seek another Word,
;
case, but all things by Him were brought to be, which theFather Chap.
*
has willed, does not this expose the many-headed craftiness 7
p. 492,
of these men ? that feeling shame at saying " work," and note p.
" " God's Word was
creature," and not before His genera-
tion," yet in another way they assert that He is a creature,
putting forward "will," and saying, "Unless He has by will
come God had a Son by necessity and against
to be, therefore
His good pleasure." And who is it then who imposes necessity
on Him, men most wicked, who draw every thing to the
purpose of your heresy ? for what is contrary to will they see ;
but what is greater and transcends" it, has escaped their per- ^
in^ep-
''*''*^'""'
ception. For as what is beside purpose is
contrary to will, so
what according to nature transcends and precedes coun-
is
selling'^. A
man by counsel* builds a house, but by nature he '
^ovXiv-
'
Thus he makes the question a nu- will,nor acting without will." Hser.
gatory one, as if it did not go to the (ID, vid. also Ancor. 51.
26. vid. also
point, and could not be answered, or Ambros. de Fid. iv. 4. vid. others, as
might be answered either way, as the collected in Petav. Trin. vi. 8. §. 14 —
case might be. Really Nature and Will 16.
^ Two distinct meanings may be at-
go together in the Divine Being, but in
order, as we regard Him, Nature is tached to " by will," (as Dr. Clark ob-
first, Will second, and the generation be- serves, Script. Doct. p. 142. ed. 1738.)
longs to Nature, not to Will. And so either a concurrence or acquiescence,
" A work
supr. is external to the nature, or a positive act. S. Cyril uses it in
but a son is the proper offspring of the the former sense, when he calls it avv-
substance. The workman frames the Spo/j-os, as quoted p. 486, note h ;
and
work when he will; but ; n offspring is when he says (with Athan. infr.) that
not subject to the will, but is proper " the Father wills His own subsist-
to the substance." p. 222. Again ; ence, Bi\rirr)s fcni, but is not what He is
" W'hereas
they deny what is by na- fromanywill, eV 0ov\7i<TfciJsrivds," Thes.
ture, do they not blush to place before p. 56. Dr. Clark would understand it in
;
it what is by will ? If they attribute to the 1-itter sense, with a view of inferring
God the willing about things which are that the Son was subsequent to a Divine
not, recognise they not that in God
why act, i.e.not eternal; but what Athan.
which lies above the will ? now it is a says leads to the conclusion that it d( es
something that surpasses will that He not matter which sense is taken. He
should be by nature, and should be does not meet the Arian objection, " if
Father of His proper Word." p. 284. not by will therefore by necessity," by
In hke manner S. Epiphanius " He :
sjieaking of a concomitant will, ormerely
begat Him neither willing 6e\wv nor saying that the Almighty exists or is
not wiUing, but in nature, which is good, by will, with S. Cyril, but he says
" nature transcends will and ne-
above will, ^ov\t]v. For He has the that
nature of the Godhead, neither needing cessity also." Accordingly, Petavius
2 K
490 If God exiats, so may His Son, by nature not by will.
•
clination' two ways, and is the property^ of a rational nature.
495 r. 1.
*
Trddos But if it be too extravagant that He should be called good
and merciful upon will, then what they have said themselves
—
must be retorted on them, " therefore by necessity and not
at His pleasure He is good;" and, " who is it which imposes
this necessity on Him ?" But if it be extravagant to speak of
they may know that this their presumption reaches even to the
Father Himself. If then they shall themselves take counsel
about will, and say that even He is from will, what then was He
before He counselled, or what gained He, as ye consider, after
iseven willing to allow that the €/c ^ovArjs as voluntas de voluntate, than, as Athan.
isto be ascribed to the ytwrjcns in the isled to do, as the voluntas Dei.
sense which Dr. Clark wishes, i. e. he '
vid. p. 216, note c. Also Serap. i.
grants that it may precede the y4vvr)ffis, 15, b. 16 init. 17, c. 20, e, a. iv. 8, 14.
i. e. in order, not in time, in the suc- Ep. iEg. 11 fin. Didym. Trin. iii. '6.
cession of our ideas, Trin. vi. 8. §. 20, p. 341. Ephr. Syr. adv. Haer. Serm.
21 and follows S. Austin, Trin. xv. 20.
;
56 557.) Facund. Tr. Cap.
init. (t. 2. p.
He who Chap.
that God not by will, has not by will but by
is
nature His proper Word. And does it not surpass all con-
.
"by favour' and will," but the Son is not a work of will, nor i
^iZoKia.
*
has come after^, as the creation, but is by nature the proper eViye-
Offspring of God's Substance. For being the proper W ord J^^'^,!' 1.*
'
of the Father, He allows us not to account^ of will as before ;^''7''^«-
and Power, and Framer of the things which seemed good to [''j '^'^j^
the Father. And this is what He says of Himself in the ^frs.
*
Proverbs Counsel
;
is Mine and secnritf/, Mine is under-
0ov\-fi.
4
standing, and Mine strength. For as, although Himself the ^''
j*^"^-
counsel*. He must
Himself be the Living" Counsel of the
Father ;
as learned from the Prophet also, that He
we have
is become the Angel of great Counsel, and is called the good I?- 9- «•
Clem. Pifid. iii. circ. fin. aocpia, xPV0-t6- ot Him Counsel from Counsel, Will
as
2 K 2
492 If the Son hj will, another Word before Him.
D'sc.
hy theof icill God, and our calling has come about hy Sis
— good
^
pleasure and icill, and all things have been brought into
being through the Word, He is external to the things which
have come to be by will, but rather is Himself the Living
Counsel of the Father, by which all these things were brought
to be by which David also gives thanks in the seventy-
;
and from nothing, they imply the same thing in other words
by pretending the words will and pleasure, which rightly
belong to things generate and creatures. Is it not irreligious
then to impute the characteristics of things generate to the
Framer of all ? and is it not blasphemous to say that will was
in the Father before the Word? for if will precedes in the Father,
the Son's words are not true, I in the Father ; or even if He is
in the Father, yet He will hold but a second place, and it became
Him not to say I in
the Father, since will was before Him, in
*
Kvpios... servants
*
? but He
Lord of all, because He is one with
is
ov\a, and the creation is all in servitude,
^j^g Father's Lordship
* ;
supr, p,
269, &c. °
eTfpov TLvSs. Tliis iilea has been
Si' iravovpyia, p. 489, r. I. The allusion is
p. 313. urged against the Arians again and to the hydra, with its ever-springing
again, as just above, p. 488, n. 4. E.g. heads, as introduced p. 484, r. 4. and
p. 13. p. 41. tin. p. 20.i. vid. p. 494. r. 1. with a special allusion to Asterius who
also Epiph. Heer. 76. p- 951. Basil, is mentioned, p. 487- and in de Syn. 18.
contr. Eunom. ii. 11. c. 17, a. &c. supr. p. 100. is called iro\vK. <To(pi(TTiis.
P Tro\vKi(pa\os a"pf(7iS. And SO ttoAuk'.
The Son theFather^s Wisdom, Understanding, Counsel, Truth. 493
standing and Counsel are the same, which is the Lord. But
these irreligious men are unwillinji; that the Son should be
Word and Living Counsel but they fable that there is with
;
"
nothing undone, and they put forward the Thought" and
" "Will" of
Yalentinus, so that they may but separate the Son
from the Father, and may call Him a creature instead of the
i Xhess.
*^"
writes to the Thessalonians,' the 2cill of
•'
God is in Christ Jesus^. b 488.
„
_ ''p.
10. Tlie Son of God then. He is the TForr/and the Wisdom ;
He the Understanding and the Living Counsel ; and in Him
is the Good pleasure of the Father ; He is Truth and Light and
Pou-er of the Father. But if the Will of God is Wisdom and
Understanding, and the Son is Wisdom, he who says that
the Son is " by will," says virtually that Wisdom has come
into being in AVisdom, and the Son is made in the Son, and
^
1 irepi T^J' fleoV. vid. p. r?8,r. 1. p.
202, avfi^aivovffav koI aTroavfifialvovcrav.
r. 3. Also Orat. 27, d. where (>upr.
i. vid. p. 37, ii<'te y. ffvjxfiaixa, Euseb.
p 220.) it is mistranslated. Euseb. Eccl. Eccl. Tbeol. iii. p. 150. in tlie same,
Theol. iii. p. 150. vid. p. 131, note e. though a technical sense, vid. also supr.
and 7r€p()3oA^, p. 38, note z. p. 18, note p. p. 37, note y. Serap.
>
e^if vid. p. 334, note y. infr. p. 515, i. 20, c. Naz. Orat. 31, 15 fin,
note r.
494 The Son icills the Father hy that will
— withWord Word
Disc, the created through the which is incompatible '
Vi'^^^j
Who being the Radiance of His Glorij and the Expression of
3. His Subsistence. But if, as we have said before, the Father's
Substance and Subsistence ' be not from will, neither, as is very
plain, what is proper to the Father's Subsistence from will
is ;
for such as, and so as, that Blessed Subsistence, must also be
the proper Offspring from It. And accordingly the Father
Himself said not, " This is the Son brought into being at
"
My will," nor the Son whom I have by My favour," but
simply Ml/ Son, or rather, in ivhoin I am icell pleased;
meaning by this. This is the Son by nature and " in Him is ;
Jchn 3, Father, and, as He says Himself, The Father loveth the Son,
35 5 20
•
' '
'and sheiceth Him all tilings. For as not "from will" did
He begin to be good, nor yet is good without will and
pleasure, (for what He His pleasure,) so also
is, that also is
" from
that the Son should be, though it came not will," yet
it is not without His pleasure or against His purpose. For as
His own subsistence* is by His pleasure, so also the Son, being
proper to His Substance, is not without His pleasure. Be then
the Son the subject of the Father's pleasure and love and thus ;
^
*
Koyi- let every one religiously account of the pleasure and the not
^'^
p 49^1 unwillingness of God. For by that good pleasure wherewith
r. 3. the Son is the subject of the Father's pleasure, is the Father
the subject of the Son's love, pleasure, and honour and one ;
here too we may contemplate the Son in the Father and the
Father in the Son. Let no one then, with Yalentinus, in-
troduce a precedent will nor let any one, by this pretence of
;
t
ovaia and are in these
virSffTaffis seldom it occurs at all in these Orations,
Chap.
"counsel," intrude between the Only Father and the Only
XXX.
Word were madness to place will and consideration
;
for it
between them. For it is one thing to say, " Of will He came
to be," and another, that the Father has love and good
ways, as has been said, so that one might suppose that the Father ^' j^
"
could even not will the Son. But to say of the Son, He might
not have been," is an irreligious presumption reaching even
to the Substance of the Father, as if what is proper to Him
might not have been. For it is the same as saying, " The
Father might not have been good." And as the Father is
.
p . p. 201,
a precedent will, but genuineness of nature, and propriety note b.
r . . . . .
if the AYord be in the heart, where is will ? and if the Son in 10.
4
p_ 6^
them condemn themselves*, and cease asking women
then let
note o. about the Son of God, or let them learn from them, that the
Orat.
'•(-,. -n 1 •
*!"
c.
and suitable to them is a refutation from human instances^,
'
'
Apol.
Ar. 36. since the perverse-minded men dispute in a human way
'
John 10 ™^y know that / am in the Father and the Father in Me,
38, 30. and / and the Father are one, and He that hath seen Me
14, 9.
^
p. 405, hath seen the But the Lord according to His
Father^.
^'^"^^^ is loving to man, and would fain hel}} them that are
Ps*^l46
8.
fallen, as the lauds of David speak but the irreligious men, ;
DISCOURSE TV.
and supr. out for another Fifth, which Moutfaucon considers he has dis-
p. 4ai. covered in the De Incarn. contra Arian., which in some MSS. is
actuallv so named. It mav be added that the Epist. ad Ep. ^cr,
o
auuf'^'""
Supr, *
"
. ,
*' i i
^^ -^^'^^- which was once commonly regarded as the First, is in some
p. 443.
6
Ep. ad MSS. called the Fourth, while in one of Montfaucon's MSS. the
Impp. so-called Fourth is altogether omitted. In a MS. in the Bodleian
and supr.
Library (Roe 29, dated 1410.) the Incarn. c. Arian. comes after
7 .^gf i\.
the first Three in the place of the present Fourth. In others the
and supr. present Fourth is called the Fifth and in others the Epist. ad;
"
p. 405. Ep. vEg. et Lib. is numbered as the Third against the Arians,"
the de Sent. Dion., divided into two parts, being apparently
^.^P'*'
reckoned as the First and Second. With variations then so con-
siderable, no evidence can be dra-^Ti from these titles on any side.
2. Next, the very opening of the Book shews that it is no
Oration or Discourse of a character like the Thi'ee which precede
it. The Second and Third begin with a formal introduction, in
which allusion is made to the general argument of which they pro-
fess to be the continuation but there is no pretence of
; composi-
tion or method in the commencement of the Fourth. It enters
abruptly into its subject, whatever that be, for it does not propose
" The Word is
it, with a categorical statement suj^ported by a text
viii. in the Tianslatiou will shew. Aud so little idea of auy con- Introd.
tinuity of subject was entertained by transcribers, that in five ^°
MSS. a place is
apparently assigned between §§. 12 and 13. to jy
the Tract de Sabbatis et Circumcisione, doubtfully ascribed to
S. Athanasius, and contained in the Benedictine, torn. ii. p. ,54.
any whei'e throughout the former Three for the solitary passage
;
Tiiree using the image of </)JJs and its a-rravyaafjia, but the last that
of TTvp and its airavyaa-jta, and irvp and <^cus. p. 515, note t. The
corrupt state of the text is a further characteristic of this Oration
compared with the foregoing.
3. Nay, we might even fancy that at least some
passages of the
Book were fragments of one or more treatises, or first draughts of
trains of tliought, or instructions for controversy, which have
accidentally been thrown together into one. The interpolation
formerly of an entirely heterogeneous tract, perhaps not Athana-
sius's, in some of its MSS. has already been mentioned and it is ;
remarkable that this Aery Tract, in all the existing MSS. noticed
by the Benedictines but one, is thrown together Avith the In illud
Omnia aud a passage from the de Decretis, thus attbrding an
instance in point. A somcAvhat similar instance is afforded by the
500 Introduction to Discourse IV.
Introd. Sermo Major de Fide published in Montfaucon's Nova Collectio,
which seems to be hardly more than a set of small fragments from
j-j
jV_ Athanasius's other works. Further, in the ease of the work before
us, some MSS. supply distinct titles to separate portions, as in §§.
9. and 11. which they
respectively head Toi;s cra/SeXXi^ovras kol tovs
aXAous EXXr]va<; epecrdat ovtws, and llpo? tows Aeyovras on rjv 6
Xoyos iv Tw 6ew cnwTrw/jtevos vcrrepov he 7rpo/3c/3A7jTat 8t' i^/xas Iva. T/jLteis
is of the
floAving oratorical character which obtains throughout the
Three Discourses, and which is not found in the sections which
precede and follow it. The same oratorical character attaches in
a manner to §§. 14, 17, 27, 28, and 34.
Further, Montfaucon tells us in the Monitum prefixed to the
Epist. Encycl. that the phrase ot irepi EicrefSLov is never used by
S. Athanasius after Eusebius's death "
"
Neque enim," he says,
;
over that the word apxr}, there used for " origin," as in the former
Orations, is in other jilaces used simjily and only in the sense of
"beginning," vid. §§. 8, 25, 26, 27. And here we may add, as a
peculiarity of the passage contained in §§. 30
—
36, its use of the
word 6eLos as an epithet of our Lord, viz. 31, d. twice, f. a 34 iuit.
36 init. Also of the verb voelv.
And what is one of the special peculiarities of the Book, so as
quite to give a character to the style, and to prove it, or at least
great part of it, to be a collection of notes or suggestions for con-
troversy, is the repeated occurrence of such phrases as Trevcrreov,
2, e. ipoiTTjTeov, 3, f. 4, a. XeKveov, 4 init. 6, d. 10, a. iXeyxreov, 3, a,
4, e. epeadai SUatov, KaXov. &c. 11, d. 14, a. 23, b. (vid. also the
Benedictine note c. on §. 9. which has been already used in another
connection.) Of the same character is the frequent clause " In
that case the same extravagant consequences, aroTra, follow," and
the like; e. g. 2, e. 4, e. 4 tin. 15 iuit. 25, b. 26 init. with which
Introduction to Discourse IV. 501
may be contrasted e. g. the more finished turn of sentence Orat. ii. Introd.
24, b. KttXov auroi)? epeo-^ai Kat ToDro, iv' €Tt /i.a\Xov 6 €Aey;!(Os K.T.X. To r),g(,
these may be added, to S' auro 8e koX -mpl 8vvdfxeo)<;, §. 3. Avhich, xy. ;
peos. 22, b. €1 /xt) Dto?, OL'Sc Aoyos. et /x-iy Xoyos, ovhe. vtos. 24 fin.
4. Further, S. Athanasius frequently implies that he is opposing
certain definite teachers of heresy, as well as heretical doctrine
itself;yet very seldom does he use names, contrary to his practice
when in controversy with the Arians, who are freely specified as
01 Apeiavot, ol 'Apcto/uavtrat, oi Trepi Evo^eyStov, not to mention the
severe and condemnatory epithets by which he has noted them.
Here however, though we read of ot aTro tov Sa/Aoo-aTcw?, and
vaguely of KUTct SaySe'AXiov, we meet more frequently with anony-
mous opponents in the singular or plural, as signified by <^aTe, §. 9
init. TTiTTTOvcTi,
§.11 init. vTreXafSe, §. 13 init. avrhv Toiavra XeyovTa,
§. 14, a. 01 ToSro Xe'yovTes, §.
15 init. KaT avTov<;, §. 21 init. Kar'
^D.
336-8. had lately arisen in Galatia, which denied Christ's eternal reign,
Kov. a description which both from country and tenet is evidently
^*^'!: levelled at Marcellus. He is followed by S. Paulinus at the
*' '"
Council of Aries, and S. Hilary, in the years which follow ;
by
but S. Athanasius seems to have acknowledged him down to about
A.D. 360. At length the latter began to own that Marcellus "was
not far from heresy," vid. Athan. Hist. O. Tr. p. 52, note 1. and
S. Hilary and S. Sulpicius say that he sej)arated from his com-
munion. S. Hilary adds (Fragm. ii. 21.) that Athanasius was
Introduction to Discourse IV. 503
the disciple of Marcellus, who had published the very heresy im- jy.
-
puted to the latter before A.D. 345, had now been deposed, with
the unanimous consent of all parties, for some years. Thus for
ten years Marcellus was disowned by the Saint with whom he
had shared so many trials but in the very end of S. Athanasius's
;
Sabellius in maintaining, (2) not that the Father was the Son and
the Son the Father, (which is called the doctrine of the vloTrarwp,)
but that (3) Father and Son were mere names or titles, and (4)
not expressive of essential characteristics,— names or titles given
to Almighty God and (5) His Eternal Word, on occasion of the
Word's appearing in the flesh, in the person, or subsistence
504 Introduction to Discourse IV.
Introd. The Word, he
(i;roo-rao-ts) of Jesus Christ, the Son of Mary.
P™^ '
considered, was from all eternity in the One God, being analogous
to man's reason within him, or the evSta^eros
IV. Xoyo? of the philoso-
phical schools. (6) This One God or //.ovas has condescended to
extend or expand Himself, -TrXarvvea-Oai, to effect our salvation.
(7 and 8) The expansion consists in the action, tvepyeta, of the
Adyo?, which then becomes the Aoyos 7rpo</>opiKos or voice of God,
instead of the inward reason. (9) The incarnation is a special
divine expansion, viz. an expansion in the flesh of Jesus, Son of
Mary (10) in order to which the Word went forth, as at the end
;
merely the Word as before; and His Kingdom, as being the King-
dom of the flesh or manhood, will come to an end.
This account of the tenets of Marcellus comes, it is true, fi-om an
enemy, who was writing against him, and moreover from an Arian
or Arianizer, who was least qualified to judge of the character of
tenets which were so opposite to his own. Yet there is no reason
to doubt its correctness on this account, Eusebius supports his
charges by various extracts from Marcellus's works, and he is cor-
roborated by the testimony of others. Moreover, if Athanasius's
account of the tenets against which he himself here writes, answers
to what Eusebius tells us of those of Marcellus, the coincidence
confirms Eusebius as well as explains Athanasius. And further,
the heresy of Photinus, the disciple of Marcellus, which consisted
in the very doctrines which Eusebius deduces from the work of
Marcellus, gives an additional weight to such deductions.
Intbod.
2. That, whereas Sabellius adopts the docti-ine of the vtoTraTwp
that the Father is the Son, and the Son the Father,
jj™^,
—
SaySe'AAtos €ts avTov TrXrjiMfjieXujv tov Trarepa, ov
vlov Aeyctv iroXfJia, jy.
Euseb. p. 76, a. And so Eugenhis, in his Explanation addressed "~
to Athanasius, anathematizes Sabellius and those who say with him,
avTOv TOV TTarepa etvat vlov, kol ore fxev ytVerat V169, /a'^ elvac rare avTOV
Trarepa, ore 8k ytVerat Trarrjp, jxr] etvat Tore vlov. Nov. Coll. t. 2. p. 2.
And S. Basil 6 SaySe'AAios cittwv, tov avrbv 6eov, eva tw vTroKCt/xevo)
:
Kayw, (f>rjalv, 6/jioAoyai yivvqaLV yevvaTat yap 6 Aoyos, ore kol AaAetTat
Kat y!rwo"KeTai.
Elsewhere Eusebius says that he held auTov [^eov] ctvat toG ev
auTw Aoyov TraTcpa. ibid. p. 167, c. though this is mere catholic
language in contrast to that Arianism of which Eusebius is guilty ;
and need not have been remarked upon, but for the following
passage about Photinus in a sermon of Nestorius, which may be
taken to illustrate it. "
Sabellius i;to7rdTopa dicit ipsum Filium,
quern Patrem, et ipsum Patrcm, quem Filium Photinus vero ;
^pTjCTTt/ctos Aoyov,
dAAa KDptojs KOL dX-qdw'i ovra Aoyov, Kat p^rjoev erepov
^ Aoyov. et Se p-rjSev 'Irepov, S'JyAov on ov8e titos rjv Kvptcos Kat a.Xr]6C}<;,
p. 61, a, b.
5. That the Word is from eternity in God, or evStd^eros, as an
attribute.
He says, ttAt/v ^eou, ovSev €Tepov rjV eT_^ev ouv t^v otKet'av So^av 6
Aoyos wv e'v tw
Trarpt. Euseb. p. 39, c. Where, it should be observed,
that the phrase ev tw ^ew was, as Montfaucon tells us, (Coll. Nov.
t. 2.
p. Ivii.) considered suspicious by many Fathers, as being a
substitution for the ScTiptural xpos tov 6e6v, which S. John (i, 1.)
2 L
506 Introduction to Discourse IV.
Introd. uses, ovK cittwv, says Eusebius, p. 121, b. ev tw ^ew, Iva /jlt] Kara-
cgeApajv, . . . TO 0€
to aytov irapa. tov TraTpos iK—opeverai,
7rvei}//,a . . .
taught Adyov elprja-Oai tov p-ovoyevrj, Kara )(peLav kul Ittl Kaipov TrpocreX-
66vTa, TraAtv 8e ei? tov o6ev i^Xdev iTravaaTpitj/avTa, ovtc Trpo Trj<i
i$68ov eti'at, ovt€ pcTO. ttjv iirdvoSov vcftecTTdvat. Ep. 52.
11. That not the Word, but Jesus is the Son. This has been
implied in some of the above extracts, but the tenet forms the sub-
ject of so large a portion of the Fourth Oration, and is ascribed to
Marcelius and Photinus by such various authors, that it must be
dwelt upon.
lepos aTToo-ToAds t€ Kai p.a6r]Trj^ tov Kvpiov IwavvTjs, says Marcelius
in Eusebius, t'^s diStdrT^TOC avTOV p.vr]p.ov€Vii)v, dXr]6r]<; eytyvcTO toC
ness of Photinus and his followers, drt p.-}] c^povovai rov viov tou O^ov
avTov €?vat tov Adyov, dAAa Statpovcrtv dAdyws kol dp-^rjv tw vtw StSowiv
dTTo T^s eK Maptas Kara adpKa ycveo'cws. Coll. N^ov. t. 2. p. 3, d.
And Nestorius says, Cogitur Photinus Verbum dicere, non
autem Verbum hoc Filium confitetur. Mercat. t. 2. p. 87. vid. also
Garner, in Mercat. t. 2. p. 314 init.
And Marcelius himself, in his explanatory statement addressed
to Pope Julius, lays especially stress on his reception of the point
of faith which is in these extracts denied, confessing the " only-
" of whose
begotton S077 Word" kingdom there shall be no end,"
"the Word, of whom Luke the Evangelist witnesses, 'as they
" "
delivered who were eye-witnesses ;' the Son, that is, the Word
of Almighty God ;" "the Father's Power, the Son." Epiph. Ha?r.
p. 835, 6.
12. That not the Word but Jesus is the Christ, the First-be-
gotten, the Image of God, the King.
Et Tts, savs Eusebius, tov utdv, <5 TrdvTa TrapeSwKcv 6 -iraT-qp, Xoyov
iv dv^pwTTOts, €tra aapKa <f)r]criv dv€iXr]cf>€vaL,
bpit,oiTO p.6vov, op.oiov TO*
KOI TOTC VLOV dcov ycyovcVat, Kat 'Irjcrovv Xpto-rdv )(pr]p.aTiaaL, (3a(TiX(a
2 l2
508 Introduction to Discourse IV.
Introd. t£ avayopevea-6ai, ciKova t€ toS 6eov tov aopdrov, koI npurroTOKOV 7raarj<;
KTtcrews, fJir] ovra Trporepov, totc a7roo€0£i;^(7a(,, Tts av AeiTrotro rofro)
tailed, goes through all the alleged tenets of Marcellus. vid. also
lu his own words, concerning the First-begotten," "
pp. 49, 50.
ov TOtVw ouTOS o dytwraros Xoyos, irpo ttj^ IvavOpwrryjo-ew; TrpcoroTOKOs
o.Trao'iys KTL(Te(t}<; (ivo/x-aoro, ttuJs yap 8vvaTov tov ctet ovra irpwroTOKOv
eivat
Tivos ;
TOV Trpu)TOV Kaivov avOpwTvov, eh ov Ta TrdvTa dvaKcc^aAatw-
d/\/Va
o 6eo<;, tovtov ai ^eiai ypat^at TrpwTOTOfcov ovoju-d^ovcrt.
(TOLcrOai i(3ovXrj97]
Euseb. p. 44, b, c. Concerning the " Image," ttcus ovv eiKova tov
aopdrov deov tov tov $€ov Xoyov AcrTeptos etvat yeypai^e at ydp etKovcs ;
TouTtuv, S)V elalv ctKove?, kol aTrdvTwv, SeLKTiKat elaiv ttus et^wv tou
dopaTOU ^eou 6 Adyo9, kol avTOS ddpaTOS wv .
;
. .
S^Aov, OTrrjVLKa ttjv
KaT ciKOva TOV Oeov yevo/^evTyv dv(.i\.rj<^€ adpKa, et/cwv tou
dopaTou ^eoD yc'yove. p. 47, a
— d. vid. also p. 142, b.
dXij^tos
ov8k 6 Adyos avTov, Kara ttjv twv dv^pwTTwv dadevaav. §. 1. V id. also
contr. Sabell. Greg. §. 5. e. This is precisely Eusebius's language
against Marcellus, e. g. evrt Se tov Xdyou, o-qixavTi-KOV avrov 8l8(jj(tl,
Disc ".vaKaAetTat, of His yevvTjcns, and (as he infers) of TravAa r^s ycwT;-
IV." crews. §. 12. §. 4, e.
Athanasius to
this doctrine, as its
(7.) imputes necessary con-
sequence, if it be not pure Sabellianism, that it considers an attri-
bute to be something real and independent in the Divine
Nature,
which therefore becomes o-vvO^to?; and this is the very conse-
quence which Eusebius imputes to the doctrine of Marcellus.
Athanasius Kara tovto rj Oeta /xovas (TvvOiTo^ ^avT^crerat,
:
reixvoixevrj
CIS ovcriav koL crvfx/SefirjKO?,
§.
2 Eusebius avvOcTov wcnrep
; :
elarjyev
TOV Oeov, ovaiav avrov VTrondeixevo^
Si^a Xoyov, o-UyU-ySe^STy/cos 8e t'^
ova-ia TOV Xoyov. p. 121. vid. p. 149, d. And so Athanasius: d
TOVTO, Trarryp ore aocfios, taos Se ore dAAa ws
fj.lv (xoffiia- fxrj TrotOTiys Tts
TavTa iv Tw 0e<2.
§.
2. Eusebius : ei 8' ev Koi tuvtov 6 6'eos kol
r)v
fj
iv rats TTapoifj.iai'; cro^ia, e'^is ovaa iv avTio voovn-ivrj, KaOo
aoc{>r]
(TOcfiOS O 6i.0<i, Tt iKwXveV, K.T.X. p. 150, b.
KtttTrarepa AeyovTos, Kat eKarepov avaipovyTO'S, ore ftev T;tos, tov irarepa, introd.
ore oe Trarrjp, tov vtoi/. §• y. t-j '
These are not all the coincidences which might be drawn out jy^
between Athanasius's Fourth Oration on the one hand, and the
writers against Marcellus and Photinus on the other and they ;
surely make it clear that against the Photinians, and not against
the Arians, that work is directed. Nor is it an objection of much
weight, that S. Athanasius is not recorded to have written against
them, nor against the earlier heresies Avhich originated them, a
circumstance which Moiitfaucon urges against the genuineness of
the contra Sabellii gregales. For if the matter of fact is so, that
this Oration does treat of Sabellianism and its offshoots, and if it
certainly is genuine, which no one denies, testimony on the point
is superfluous, and the absence of it may need an explanation but
can prove nothing. Such an explanation, however, is afforded iu
Sirmond's remark upon S. Jerome's silence concerning Eusebius's
Tracts against Sabellius, De infinitis volumiuibus, he says, quas
ab Eusebio edita testatur, pauca, certe non omnia [Hieronymum]
commemoriisse. 0pp. t. 1. init.
Additional evidence, just now alluded to, of a minute character,
is contained in some of the notes which follow in which too is
;
Subject I.
§§.1-5.
The substantialitT of theWord proved from Scriptm-e. If the One Origin
be suhstantial, Its Word is substantial. Unless the Word and Son be a
second Origin, or a -work, or an attribute (and so God be compounded),
or at the same time Father, or involve a second nature in God, He is
from God's Substance and distinct from Him. Illustration of John 10,
30. drawn from Deut. 4, 4.
§1. 1. The "Word is from God^; for the Word teas God, and
John 1, u-hom are the Fathers, and of whom Christ, icho
1.
again, Of
Jlom. 9, is God over all, blessed for ever. Amen. And since Christ''
5.
is God from God, and God's Word, Wisdom, Son, and Power,
a
In this opening section, the abrupt- quotes from Scripture is rather directed
ness of which shews that something against Arians (vid. Orat. i. p. 193. Se-
was meant to precede it, the author is rap. ii. 2.) than against Sabellians, but
meeting the objection of Marcellus, he seems to mean it to be an admission
Theol. pp. to them, lest he should be thought to
(urged, e. g. Euseb. Eccl.
an— 10, 100, b. c. 119, d. 141, b.) deny it. It must be granted also, that in
that plurality of Persons involves plu- one place referred to he uses the word
" Christ" when the
ralityof Gods ; which he here answers, arguing against
by insisting on the relation of the Second Arians, though this Is not unnatural,
Person to the First, i. e. as Eusebius, when it has once occurred. Nor must
it be forgotten that S. Hilary uses
by the doctrine of the Monarchy.
b The introduction of the word Christus commonly for our Lord's divine
" Christ" nature, vid. Bened. Praef. p. xlii
(vid. also §§. 3
init. 4. c-e. 15, c.
*
of the Godhead indivisible ^
and inseparable. Subj.
yet the Unity is
^
And thus too we preserve One Origin of Godhead and not ,
^^^g^
two Origins, whence there is properly a divine Monarchy^, unit.
And of this very Origin the Word is by nature Son, not as if "^^^^
another origin, subsisting by Himself, nor having come into
being externally to that Origin, lest from that diversity a
Dyarchy and Polyarchy should ensue but of the one ;
was God and since He is from It, therefore also the Word
;
teas God.
2. And and therefore one God, so
as there is one Origin
s which indeed and
that Substance and Subsistence
one is
45. and here. Athan. attributes a Kptlrrov [^^V] 6z7ov iravrhs (rvvQirov au-
Dyarchy to Marcion and Valentinus, jj-utos contr. ^larc. p. 5, d.
de Syn. 52. supr. Eusebius re-p. 153.
'^
ouSty irXfov; and so Euseb. contr.
turns a like answer to Marcellus p. 109. Marc. p. 55, b. and infr. I7. -n-Adov
as Athan. here to his nameless sntago- oiiSiv 6 \6yos tov vlov ex^'-
Also 20, e.
nist. The principle of the Catholic and Serap. ii. 1, b. On the classical use
Monarchia is found infr. 17- ovSev ev of the phrase vid. Blomf. Gbss. in
irphs rhu trartpa, €i ^tj rh e^ avTov. .\gam. 995.
514 Since God is One and Substantive, so is Sis Word and Son.
Word, and Son existing, but simply Wisdom and Word and
Son in the Father ", then the Father Himself would have a
3
\6yov, nature compounded of wisdom and reason^. But if so, the
word. *
forementioned extravagances would follow and He will be ;
does not subsist who owns, or rather who is, these titles.
p. 307, If then He does not subsist, the names are idle and empty ^>
note d.
say that God is Very Wisdom and Very Word p.
"
6 unless we
p. 518,
r. 2. But if so. He
His own Father and Sonis Father, when ;
Wise, Son, when Wisdom'' but these things are not in God ;
1
In a somewhat similar passage, ad Bevereg. Synod, t. 2. Not. p. 100.
Ep. M^. IC. he is arguing against, P Petavius considers that he here de-
not Sabellians, but Arians. nies these titles to the Son, though else-
"1 vid. rontr. Sabell. Greg. §. 5, d. where he attributes them. E. g. contr.
Basil, contr. Eunom. ii. 17. Euseb. Gent. 40, a. 46 tin. de Incarn. V. D.
Eccl. Theol. p. 150, a. 20, b. Orat. ii. 78, d. 79, e. 80, e. Se-
" ivTw
Trarpi. he is here opposing the rap. iv. 20, c. If so, there is no inconsist-
usual formula of Sabellius andMarcellus, ency ;
he admits them, (vid. contr. Gent.
who subsiiluted eV tu> dew for the Scrip- 46.) in contrast to the (ro^ia, &c. of
tural irphs Toi/ 8e6i>. vid. supr. p. 50!(. (6.) creatures he denies them as implying
;
pressions, Zeno. Ver. and Marius Vict, Syst. iv. 36. (p.675. ed. 1733.) nay,
not to say S. Hilary and S. Augustine. by Athanasius.
S. Mosheim in loc.
vid. Thomassiu. de Trin, 9. For vloird- seems to defend Athan. Petavius im-
Tojp vid. supr. p. 97, note k. to which putes it to Athenagoras, Dogra. t. 2.
add Nestor. Serm. 12. ap. Marc. Merc. p. 22. whom Bull defends, D. F. N. iii.
Subj.
away with the dishonourable thought
^
as a certain quality ; ;
clearly follow that the Divine One ', indivisible as it is, must 1''^^
be compound, being severed into substance and accident '.
4. We
must ask then these reckless men The Son was ;
a Word, and Wisdom from the Wise ", and from the Father a
Son. For in this way the Unity" remains undivided and
entire ^, and Its Son and Word, is not unsubstantive, nor not
^ '
So (TvydfTov rhv 6edveK irotorrjTos Kal vid. infr. §.10 fin. this is unusual
oiiaias Ae'^ers.ad Afros. 8. vid. the whole witliAthanasius, who commonly speaks
passage, which, however, is directed of Light and its Radiance, vid. supr.
against, not Sabellians, but Arians. This p. 39, note b.
is the point of heresy in which the two
^ Pater verax, Filius
Veritas; quid
agreed, vid.supr.p. 41, notee. However, est aniplius, verax an Veritas Pius .'
the argument is not exactly the same. homo plus est, an pietas sed plus est .''
For that ad Afros, vid. Basil. Ep. 8, 3. ipsa pietas ; pius enim a pietate, non
and Cyril. Thes. p. 134. Here he is re- pietas a pio. Plus est puk-hritudo quam
ferring to the great doctrine, or rather pulcher. Castitas plane plus est quam
" all
mystery, that Christ is oAos Oehs, castas. Nuniquid dicturi sumus plus
God," as fully and entirely the one in- Veritas qnaui Verax.' si hoc dixerimus,
finitely simple, all-perfect Being, as if Filium incipiemus dicere Patre ma-
there were no Person in the Godhead jorem. Verax enim Pater non ab ea
but He; not an attribute, habit, or the veritate verax est cujus partem cepit,
like, which would be making attributes sed quam totam genuit. August, ia
real distinctions in the Divine Nature, Joann. 39, 7- vid. also Ambros. de Fid.
not aspects (as they are) under which V. n.29.
we men necessarily view that Nature. X It has been observed,
p. 326, note g.
This the Sabellians seemed to hold, and that the Mystery of the Doctrine of tiie
thus made it compound. Vid. in like Holy Trinity is not merely a verbal con-
manner supr. p. 334, note y. Epiph. tradiction, but an incompatibility in the
HjEr. 73. p. 8,52. Cyril. Thes. p. 145. human ideas conveyed by them. We
Basil, contr. Sabell. I. Nyssen. contr. can scarcely make a nearer approach
Eunom. i.
p. 69. App. Max. Cap. de Ca- to an exact enunciation of it, than that
rit. t. i. p. 445Damasc. F. O.i. 13. p. 151. of saying that one thing is two things.
s SoEusebius of Marcellus, crvi/deTov The Father is all that is God; He is
rov dfbv, ovtnav Six^t Aoyou av/x-
ftffrjyev the One, Eternal, Infinite Being, abso-
ovaia r6v \6yov.
/3ei37)«os 5e ttJ Eccl. lutely and wholly. And His Nature is
Theol. p. 121, b. c. Vid. however most simple and free from parts and
Athan. speaking of Arians, de deer. passions. Yet this One God is also
22. supr. p. 38, note y. (where Eu- the Son, and He is the One God as
sebius's opinion has been misstated ; absolutely and wholly as the Father,
Demonstr.v. pp.213, c. 215, a.)
vid. also yet without being the Father. In this
Also supr. p. 4!J3, and notes q, r, s. ad world we have often great changes in
Ep. iEg. §. Ifi, a. the same being, so that He is one thing
516 The Word, if not from God, is a second Origin or a creature.
10.
and the Father in 3Ie.
§.3. 6. And again, Christ^ is Did then He
the Word of God.
subsist by Himself, and was joined to the
after subsisting
Father, or did God make Him and call Him His Word ? If
the former, I mean, if He subsisted by Himself and is God, then
there are two Origins and moreover, as is plain. He is not pro-
;
there are two. But if they be not two, but belong to the
same, cause and eflfect will be the same, and
'*
begotten and
begetting, which has been shown absurd in the instance of
Sabellius. But if He be from Him, yet not another, He will
be both begetting and not begetting begetting because He ;
Subj.
only says that the Word exists with God, let such a one fear
lest, shrinking from what is said in Scripture, he fall into an j
g
-
not granting that the Word is from the Unity ^, but simply (,j,e, or
as if He were ioined'' to the Father, He introduces a duality^ ?""^',^
•'
^ 1
ouaoa
of substance'^, and neither of them Father of the other. And
the same of power*. And we may see this more clearly, we *
if vid.
* '
and not word- less? does He possess the "Word and the
Wisdom from without, or from Himself? If from without,
there must be one who first gave to Him, and before He
received He was wisdom-less and word-less. But if from
Himself, it is plain that the Word is not from nothing, nor
once was not for He was
;
ever since He of whom He is
;
that Word was brought to be, plainly so were all things and ;
note. '^
ov Suo Trarepey, aAA' efs. So Euse-
c Athanasius here retorts bins against Marcellus, ovk avayKO.-
upon the
Sabellian schools the objection of the C^rai 5uo Trarepas iliri7v ovSe Svo vlovs.
Monarchia, observing that the fact of p. 109, c.
the derivation of One Person from the e That is, since the Sabellians de-
Other is that which preserves in fact nied our Lord's substantive exist-
the numerical Unity unimpaired, as ence, and the Arians His divinity, to
described just above, note x. vid. also dwell upon a father's comm\niication of
p. 402,
note g. Not that we can un- nature to his children, was tlie mode of
derstand it does this.
ho>i' Eusebius shewing our Lord's divinity, and to
objects Marcellus his holding the
to dwell on tlie idea of a son was the mode
awayivnrov. Eccl. Theol. pp. 119, c. d. of shewing (vid. Euseb. in Marc. i. 4.
\fi:\.A.K6yovix^'-^^''^°-^^VV''<^y^^voi'Ka\ p. 19.) that He was no abstraction or
(fvvi\ixft.iuovahT^<pr)a\v,u)sdtir\-i^vTivaKa\ attribute, but a living subsistence.
518 If God has no Son, He has no work.
Disc, it must be lie of whom John says, A/l things tccre made
tT
— — hy Him,; and the Psalmist, In Wisdom hast Thou made them
'
John 1,
'' '
3. all. And
Christ will be found to speak untruly \ / in the
24]
'
a'
14 follow already mentioned. For He will be compound ^ and
note q. -^{W become His own Son and Father \ Moreover, we must
confute and silence them on the ground, that the Word
'
r. 2.
r.
P;
4.
^^'*'
which is in God^ cannot be a creature nor out of nothing.
^'^ ^
s
arg. ad But if the Word be but in God, then He must be Christ
p°5lo!"
^^^ says, I am in the Father and the Father in Me, who
(6-) also is therefore the Only-begotten, since no other is begotten
from Him. He
One Son, who is Word, Wisdom,
is the
Power for God is not compounded of these, but is gene-
;
note e'
Work for the Son is His Offspring through whom He
;
8 *
p. 338. works but if not, the same questions and the same extra-
;
note f.'
vagances will follow their audacity.
P' ''^"' 10. From Deuteronomy; But ye that did attach yourselves
% 5. tinto the Lord your God are alive every one of you this day.
Deut. 4, Prom this we may see the difference, and know that the
Son of God is not a creature. For the Son says, I and the
diately adds. What nation is there so great icho hath God Deut. 4,
Deut.
again in the same Deuteronomy, Ye shall obey His voice, and 13, 14.
apply yourselves unto Him; but what is applied, is applied
from without.
Subject II.
§ ^. 6, 7.
When the Word and Son hungered, wept, and was wearied. He acted as
our Mediator, taking on Him what was ours, that He might impart to
us what Avas His.
Disc. 1. And ill answer to the weak and huraan notions of the
on— Arians, their
:
o that the Lord is in want, when He
supposing
i J. '
Matt ^^^^' ^^ given unto Me, and / received, and if Paul says,
28, 18. Wherefore hath lie highly exalted Him, and He set Him at
'
"'
Q the right hand, and the like, we must say, that our Lord,
Eph. 1,
being Word and Son and became Son
of God, bore a body,
of Man, that, having become Mediator between God and
men. He might minister the things of God to us, and ours
'
'
^laKovrj
a",'' 47^'
^^^ ^^' ^^^ ^^ Him they may be annulled^. And when it is
and nnre Said, All power is given unto Me, and I received, and Where-
*
"x^oio-. '/o''^
^^(^^^^ God highly exalted Him, these are gifts given
fxa-a from God through Him.
to us For the Word was never in
5
p. 242 "vvant^, nor came into being^ nor again were men sufficient to
;
I"'*'
^pp. 24?,
o.-.
.
^ the Word
^ for themselves, but throug^h
niinister^ these things
_ _ ^
374, 377. they are given to us ;therefore, as if given to Him, they are
^J""""''' imparted to us. For this was the reason of His becoming
man, being given to Him, they might be transferred
that, as
*pp. 240, to us*. For of such gifts mere ^ man had not become worth}' ;
1'^f\f
and again the mere Word had not needed them '" the AVord ;
'"pp. then was united to us, and then imparted to us power, and
upp ^'highly exalted us'\ For the Word being in man, highly
2.'i9, 240. exalted man himself ^^ and, when the Word was in man, ;
His account ;
for on account of the Word in man were these Subj.
-,-.-_ II.
gifts
'
'
received ;
that it miglit be shewn, that man himself, being ^
P- 455.
hungers not hungering, but oflers up what is ours that it may 444 '^g^"
be abolished, so the gifts which come from God instead of our
infirmities,doth He too Himself receive, that man, being
united to Him, may be able to partake them. Hence it is that
the Lord says. All things whatsoever Thou hast given Me, /John 17,
ham given them, and again, I pray for them. For He prayed
for us, having taken on Him what is ours, and He gave while
He received. Since tlien, the Word being united to man
himself", the Father, regarding Him, vouchsafed to man to '
-^v Sf-
^'^'^^
be exalted, to have all power and the like, therefore are
Word, and are as if given to Him, all things
referred to the
which through Him we receive. For as He for our sake
became man, so we for His sake are exalted. It is no
extravagance then, if, as for our sake He humbled Himself,
so also for our sake He is said to be highly exalted. So He Pbil. 2,
gave to Him, that is, "to us for His sake;" and He highly
exalted Him, that is, "us in Him." And the Word Him-
self, when we are exalted, and receive, and are succoured,
2 M
Subject III.
§.8.
Arians date the Son's beginning earlier than the Photinians.
Him no being at all, are angry with those who at least grant
Him to be in time ^. Thus these also confess what they deny,
in the act of censuring the others. And again the Eusebians,
confessing a Son, deny that He is the Word by nature, and
'
would have the Son called "Word notionally and the others ;
a 01 irepl EixrfPiov. vid. supr. p. 501. note b. The pre-existence of the Son
of is the main
Such as Eusebius Caesarea may point urged against Mar-
be glanced at, who brings with great cellus by Eusebius throughout his work,
indignation the charge against ]\Iar- who makes much of what is in fact the
cellus, of his considering our Lord as distinguishing mark between their re-
Pa(Ti\fvs only from His incarnation, i. 1. spective heresies. Athan. urges it as a
p. fj. ii. p. 32, c. or that
His Kingdom reductio ad absitrdnm against the Arian
had a beginning, pp. 49, 50, 54. interpretation of Phil. ii. 9, 10. that it
b On this difference between Sabel-
really led to a denial of this doctrine,
lians and Arians, vid. supr. p. 1 14, supr. p. 234.
Suhject IV.
§§. 9, 10.
Unless Father and Son are two in name only, or as parts and so each
imperfect, or two gods, they are consubstantial, one in Godhead, and the
Son from the Father.
^ This and the next section are in infr. 15. 'Apeiavoov to and 23.
(pp6vr]ij.a,
2 M 2
524 One God,hecausetheSonisfro}nthe Father, andthatindmsihly.
Disc, there are two, because there is Father and Son that is, the
J
—~- Word
IV.
and one because one God \ For if this is not so, He
^,
^,
20°
Father, Him who begat Him and in the 0)ie the one God-
;
!• 1-
*
but the divine teaching knows Father and Son, and Wise
p. 514,' . .
note o. and Wisdom, and God and Word while it altogether guards ;
note c' So^ ^^^ Sabellianise. For if to speak of two, is to fall into
Gentilism, therefore if we speak of one, we must fall into Sa-
bellianism. But this is not so perish the thought but, as
;
!
when we say that Father and Son are two, we still confess
one God, so when we say that there is one God, let us con-
sider Father and Son two, while they are one in the Godhead,
and in the Father's Word, being indissoluble and indivisible
and inseparable from Him. And let the fire and the radiance
from it be a similitude of man, which are two in being and in
appearance, but one in that its radiance is from it iudi visibly.
f vid. latter
part of note fat p. 211 commenting on the same text, in the
supr. on S. Gregory Nyssen's statement same way e.g. %v rii ISiStyjtl kqI
; otKeio-
that " the First Person in the Holy rrjTi t^s (pvaeois, kuI rfj ravrSTrjTi tt^s
"
forth and return of the Word a doctrine which implies change and
;
Arians then are more bountiful to us than to the Son for, they ;
say, not His sake, but He for ours, came to be that is,
we for ;
KpojioXTj, development orissue, vid. supr. ttoi?, oiVAertrTOf TcavS7]jj.iovpywi', Kal crtcii-
p. 97. note h. If the word here allude irwuTes, ra eavrwr iKTeXovaiv (pya, Kal
to Sabellius and Marcellus, it is used jxaKiffra on lUTjSfis avTols irdpfaTi
as an arf/. ad invidiam : Valentinus and Srifiiovpyov(n,Ti ouu (Kw\ve Kal rhuQ^bv
Sabellius are put together (as Valentinus ovrta ttojs ra navra crvaTrjcraaQaL exoi/Ta
and Marcellus, Euseb. Eccl. Theol. ii. iv avrtfi rbi/ \6yov Eccl. Theol. p.
;
^^^^-
2. Moreover it is right to ask them, whether the Word, when
He was in God, was perfect, so as to be able to make. If on the
one hand He was imperfect, when in God, but by being begotten
'
p. 108, became perfect \ we are the cause of his perfection, that is, if He
t^s been begotten for us for on our behalf He has received
p 201, ;
gression be generation. His return will be the close* of that gene- iraCAa,
^
ration*^, for when He has become in God, God will be silent again. ^'2'
'
due course He will bring that also to a close, and will devise ^
«'?
crapKl crvfrjv ; Euseb. contr. Marc. p. 54, Moral. 29. but this is a question of
c. vid. also p. 167, a. words.
•^
TravXa ttjs yeviffews. The Catholic '
iSIarcellus's doctrine suggests a
doctrine of the aeiyevAs is stated supr. parallel line of thought to Eusebius.
p. 201, note b. vid. also p. 495, r. 2. He says that, all immortality depend-
Didymus however says, ovk ael yivvarai, ing on the Son, if the Son cease to be,
de Trin. iii. 3. p. 3^8. but with the in- the Saints will lose Him
in whom they
tention of maintaining our Lord's per- live ov Si'xa toD xP'o'toO, K\r)pov6fxo
;
qu. TT., d.
-
iraQos. and it is what it was, and does but undergo an afiection ". If
^
^
*
fx.ovds
then the One being
dilated became a Three *, and the One
Tpidj
was the Father, and the Three is Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost, first the One being dilated, underwent an affection
and became what it was not for it was dilated, whereas it ;
was not dilated. Next, if the One itself was dilated into a
Three and that. Father and Son and Holy Ghost, then Father
"^j
referring to Synesius's adoption of them, also 2.3, 8. and Basil, de Sp. S. 47.
De Deo ii. 8. §. 17. Naz. refers to But such statements are open to no
them with blame, as of a material cha- misconstruction, vid. supr. p. 399, note b.
God at once is FatJier, and is Son, and is Holy Ghost. 529
longer only Father. And a man who thus should lie, might
ascribe a body to God, and represent Him as passible
' '
-"o.^-^-^^^
;
^ iraflos
for what is dilatation, but an affection^ of that which is
dilated? or what the dilated, but what before was not so,
but was strait instead for it is the same, in time only ;
2. And this the divine Apostle knows, when he writes to the §• •''*•
Corinthians, Be
ye not straitened in us, hut he ye yourselves 2 Cor. 6,
same heart, and the same Japheth is in the dilatation. If then 27.
Opcinra)
and thirdly Spirit ^ if so be He was Himself dilated, and
;
f This passage is like one in Euse- 6e6s. crarpais evrevQiv rov ffaiTrjpoi Ttepl
bius contr. Marc, ti to'ivvv ?V t6 KareA- toO irarphs \iyovros, eXfyxeroj Map-
Ohv TOVTO irph tov ivavOpanrTJcrai ; vdvTws KiWos avrhv rhv narJpa ivT]i>QponTriKivai
irov,((>r](riy,TrviVf^a' el Sh Trvevixa,Trvtvfj.a
6 eliruy. pp. 35, 36.
Suhject VII.
§§.15—24.
Since the "Word is from God, He must be Son. Since the Son is from
everlasting, He must be the "Word ; else either He is superior to the
Word, or the "Word is the Father. Texts of the iSTew Testament "whicli
state the unity of the Son with the Father therefore the Sou is the
Word. Three heretical hypotheses — 1. That the
;
and others both that the man and the Word, then became
"
Son when they were united And others say that the Word '^^•
'\
from being Word, they say, He became Son, not being ^' ^^ ^^'
Son before, but only Word.
2. Now
both are Stoic doctrines, whether to say that God
^
was dilated or to deny the Son ;
but especially is it absurd
the /j-oi/oyevris first, the Koyos next. down that the apxcd tuv oAwv are two,
Perhaps by saying that the Stoics rb TroiowKaiTbiroo-xor.then Tb;utf Trdo--
*>
denied the Son, he means to allude to x"" "^V" v\rii/ ehai, rh Se ttoiovv rhv iv
their doctrine, that their \6yos or God aur^ \6yov rhu Oedv. vid. Lips. Physiol,
was one of the two Ingenerate Prin- Stoic, i. 4.
ciples, matter being the other. Laer-
532 If the Wordfrom God, He is Son ; if a Son, He is the Word.
Disc,
1\
fo name the Word, yet deny Him to be Son. For if the
Him
.
what exists
^°^^^^^
- chansre
o for that
:
'
belongs
o to bodies but if He became ;
p. 523,
note d. Father, as in the instance of creation He became afterwards
3 vid
a Maker, let them know that the change is in the things
supr.
p. 223. -which afterwards came to be, and not in God. If then the Son
8 16 '
^'
too were a work, well might God begin to be a Father towards
Him as others but if the Son is not a work, then ever was
;
*
p. 201,
the Father and ever the Son *. But if the Son was ever. He
note b.
^^gj. i^g ^Yie Word
^
for if the Word be not Son, and this be
;
one knoiceth the Father save the Son ^, not the Word. Either
Matt. 11,
then the,Word does not know, or if He knows, it is not true
'
27.
4. And
the same of He that hath seen Me, hath seen the
Father, and / and the Father are One, for this the Son -says,
and not the Word, as they would have it, as is plain from the
Gospel for according to John when the Lord said, / and
;
the Father are One, the Jews took up stones to stone Him.
Jesus s answered them. Many good works have I shewed you John 10,
'-""**'*•
from Father, for ivhich of those works do ye stone Me ?
My
The Jews ansioered Him, saying, For a good work ice stone
Thee not, hut for blasphemy, and because that Thou, being a
man, makest Thyself God. Jesus answered them. Is it not
tcritten in your law, I said, Ye are gods ? If he called them
gods unto whom the Word of God came, and the Scriptures
cannot he broken, say ye of Him, whom the Father hath
sanctified and sent into the tvorld. Thou blasphemest, because
I said, I am the Son of God ? If I do not the works of My
Father, believe Me not. But if I do, though ye believe not
Me, believe the tcorks, that ye may know and believe that the
Father Me, and I in the Father. And vet, as fur as
is in
the surface of the words intimated, He said neither " I
am God," nor "I am Son of God," but I and the Father are
One. The Jews, then, when they heard One, thought like ^. 17.
Sabellius, that He said that He was the Father, but our
Saviour shews their sin by this argument "
Though I said ;
are One of the Son. For nothing is one with the Father,
but what is from Him. What is That which is from Him
but the Son? And therefore He adds, that ye may know
"
is, the Word.'
f
Eusebius says that Marcellus, as that pp. 77, 78.
it were, corrected this text, while he This passage is urged against
6
quoted it; "as if correcting the Sa- Marcellus in the same way by Eusebius,
Son,' he
'
viour's words, instead of p. 87.
names again 'Word,' thus saving, 'No •>
vid. Euseb. contr. Marc. p. 17.
one knoweth the Father save the Son,
534 If the Son not the Word, not the Word but the Son the Superior.
Disc, ffiat I am in the Father and the Father in Me. For, when
expounding the One, He
and the insepa-
said that the union
rability lay, not in This being That, with which It was One,
but in His being in the Father and the Father in the Son.
For thus He overthrows both Sabellius, in saying, not, / am
" the
Father," but, the Son of God; and Arius, in saying, are
One.
5. Word are not the same, it is
If then the Son and the
not that the Word
one with the Father, but the Son nor
is ;
whoso hath seen the Word hath seen the Father, but he that
hath seen the Son. And from this it follows, either that the
Son greater than the Word, or the Word has nothing be-
is
yond the Son. For what can be greater or more perfect than
One, and / in the Father and the Father in Me, and He
that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father ? for all this is
John 12, said by the Son. And hence the same John says. He that
text^r'ec
^'^'^^^^ ^^^^^ -^^f ^^^'^^^ ^^^^ Him that sent Me, and He that
Matt. 10, receiveth Me, receiveth Him that sent Me ; and, / am come
40.
John 12,
o,
light into the icorld, that whosoever helieveth in Me,
^fV^^'
*^^^''^^^ ^^''^ abide in darkness. And if any one hear My
loords and observe them not, I judge him not; for I
came not to judge the world, but to save the world. The
ox6yos,word^ which he shall hear, the same shall judge him in the
^
^^'^'^
^^'^^y^
because I go unto the Father. The preaching \ He
xlpiXua
says, shalljudge him who has not observed the command-
ment "for if," He says, " I had not come and spoken unto
;
them, they had not had sin; but now they shall have no
cloke, He says, having heard My words, through which those
who observe them shall reap salvation."
lb. 3, Son of God, by the same John's saying, before For God so ',
16—19. Jq^.^^i fj^^ icorld that He gave His Only-begotten Son, that
everlasting life. For God sent not His Son into the world
con- ——-
world, through
might he saved. He that believeth on Him is not
donned, hut he that heUeveth not is condemned already,
because he hath not believed in the Name of the Only-
hegoiten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that
light is come into the world, and men loved darkness
rather than light, because their deeds are evil. If He who
says, For I came not to judge the tcorld, hut that I might
save it, is the Same He that seeth Me,
as says. seeth Him John 12,
that sent Me, and if He who came to save the world and not
judge it is the Only-begotten Son of God, it is plain that it
is the same Son who says, He that seeth Me, seeth Him that
sentMe. For He who said. He that believeth on Me, and, w. 44,
If any one hear My words, I judge him not, is the Son "*'^"
believeth not on the Son, that light hath come into the
world, and they believed not in Him, that is, in the Son ;
whom also the Evangelist witnesses that all things were made
'^
vid. in like manner Eusebius contr. '
vid. also Euseb. Eccl. Theol. p.
Marcell. pp. 83, 87, 117- 142, c.
536 Texts in Scripture which are spoken of the Son not the Word.
Disc, two
by Him. For either they will be compelled to speak of
worlds, that the one may have come into being by the Son
and tlie by the Word, or, if the world is one and the
other
creation one, follows that Son and Word are one and the
it
ning icas the Son ". But if because John did not say, " In the
beginning was the Son," they shall maintain that the attributes
'
Sopa, p. of the Word do not suit with the Son, it at once' follows that
" ' ^' "'
the attributes of the Son do not suit with the Word. But to
John 10, the Son belongs, as was shewn, / and the Father are One,
world ;
for of necessity the Framer is before the things He
brings into being.
9. And what is said to Philip must belong, not to the
John 14, Word, would have it ", but to the Son.
as they For, Jesus
said, says Scripture, Have I been so long time tvith you, and
yet thou hast not known Me, Philip ? He that hath seen
Me, hath seen the Father. And how sayesf thou then,
Shew Its the Father BeUevest thou not, that I am in the
'}
and He who said, Re that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father ;
for He, the same who thus si^oke, shews Himself to be the
Son, by adding, that the Father may he glorified in the Son.
10. If then
they say that the Man whom the Word bore, §• 20.
and not the Word, is the Son of God the
Only-begotten ^ the
Man must be by consequence He who is in the Father, in
whom also the Father is and the Man must be He who is
;
One with the Father, and who is in the bosom of the Father,
and the True Light. And they will be compelled to say that
through the Man Himself the world came into being, and
that the Man was He who came not to judge the world but
to save it and that He it was who was in being before
;
not extravagant, if the flesh, which the "Word bore, itself is ^^^"- ^•
the Son, to say that the flesh from Mary is that by which the
world was made ? and how will they retain He was in the
icorld ? for the Evangelist,
by way of signifying the Son's
antecedence to the birth according to the flesh, goes on to
say.
He was in theicorld. And how, if not the Word but the Man
is the Son, can He save the world,
being Himself one of the
world ? And if this does not shame them, where shall be the
Word, the Man being in the Father ? And what will the Word
be to the Father, the Man and the Father being One ? But if
theMan be Only-begotten, what will be the place of the
Word ? Either one must say that He comes second, or, if
He be above the Ouly-begotten, He must be the Father
Himself. For as the Father
is One, so also the
Only-
begotten from Him is One
and what has the Word above
;
the Man, if the Word is not the Son ? For, while Scripture
says that through the Son and the Word the world was
" This is the first of the three as a title of the Word manifested in
hypo-
theses noted above, p. 531. This form the flesh, vid. Euseb. pp. 81,82. the
of Sabellianism closely approximates to human being, whom He assumed, being
what was afterwards Ncstorianism. As in his creed " the Son of man," not of
to Marcellus, it is a question whether God. vid. ibid. pp. 42, a. 77, c. 87, b.
he admitted any " Son of God," except
2 N
538 Faith and Baptism in the Son not in the Word.
frame the world, yet as to the sight ' of the Father Scripture
proceeds to place it, not in the Word but the Son, and the
saving of the world, to attribute it not to the Word, but to
the Only-begotten Son. For, saith it, Jesus said. Have I
been so long while with you, and yet hast thou not known
Me, Philip ? He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father.
Nor does Scripture say that the Word knows the Father, but
the Son and that not the Word sees the Father, but the
;
and '—
necessity the flesh Son, all those extravagances follow
is
which have been already drawn from saying that the Man is
Son. But if the flesh is called Son because of the Word,
then even before the flesh the Word certainly, being such,
was Son. For how could a being make other sons, not being
himself a son, especiall}' when there was a father ? If then
* ' '
p- 416,
God may be called our Father also; for He hath sent forth, Gal, 4, 6
says Scripture, the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crging,
Abba, Father. Therefore the Son in us, calling upon His
own Father, causes Him to be named our Father also. Surely
in whose hearts the Son is not, of them neither can God be
called Father. But if because of the Word the ]\[an is
^ *
called Son, itfollows necessarily, since the ancients are p- 548,
sons, saith Scripture; and in the time of Noe, When the q^„' q^
sons of God saw, and in the Song, Is not He Thy Father ? ^•
Therefore there was also that True Son, for whose sake they 32, 6.
too were sons. But if, as they say again, neither of the two
is Son, but it depends on the concurrence of the two, it
follows that neither is Son I say, neither the Word nor the
;
t
oyTosiUciA.i(rTa Trarpi^s. This is hardly tav fj.d\. Oral. ii. T ,
a. evda fiaK. Orat.
the sense of fidAiffra which in this ii. 10, c. ota /xaA. Orat. iii. 32, b.
position is common; vid. supr. p. 52, /U67aA.(U)y/iaA. Orat. iii. 42 init. d/couoj'Tes
note c. Also koI to. fid\i<xra. de Syn.
ei ftaA.. ad Ep. ^g. 20 tin.
2 N 2
540 Against Scripture that the Word became Son when Man.
Disc, the uniting. Therefore in this also the Son was before
way
the flesh.
13. When this then is nrged, they will take refuge in
another pretext, saying, neither that the Man is Son, nor
both together, but that the Word was Word indeed simply
in the beginning, but when He became Man, then He was
'
p 307, named Son '
;
for before His appearing He was not Son but
Word only ;
and as the Word became flesh, not being flesh
before, so the Word became Son, not being Son before^.
Such are their idle words ;
but they admit of an obvious
§. 23. refutation. For if simply, when made Man, He became Son,
the becoming Man is the cause. And if the Man is cause of
His being Son, or both together, then the same extravagances
result. Next, if He is first Word and then Son, it will appear
that He knew the Father afterwards, not before for not as ;
jj'^o';.
knoweth the Father but the Son. And this too will result,
John
Q
1, that He became afterwards in the bosom of the Father, and ./ 7
1
14, 9. is. He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father. For all
these things are said of the Son. Hence the}" will be forced
to say, the Word was nothing but a name^. For neither is
it He who is in us with the Father, nor whoso has seen the
Word, hath seen the Father, nor was the Father known to
any one at all, for through the Son is the Father known, (for
so it is And he to u-homsoever the Son will reveal
written,
Him,) and, the Word not being yet Son, not yet did any
know the Father. How then was He seen by Moses, how
by the fathers ? for He says Himself in the book of Kings,
1 Sam. 2, Was I not plainly revealed to the house of thy father ?
'' ^"^
'
'^
Marcellus seems to express this \6yov, au/j.(pva t^ 6f^, cti'Si'cos ai/ra
view in various pa'=sages in Eusebius, (rvySfra koI rivoifj-ivou. p. 32.
who reports him as holding ixijre elvai y This is a retort upon Marcellus,
opinion that the Son came later than the Word, because not
in the Old, but in the New Testament only, is He spoken of.
This is what thoy irreligiously say for first to separate ;
between the Testaments, so that the one does not hold with
the other, is the device of Manichees and Jews, the one of
whom oppose the Old, and the other the New*. Next, on '
p. 258,
Father, are later, for these testimonies are adduced not from
the Old but from the New. But it is not so for in truth §. 24. ;
much is said in the Old Testament also about the Son, as in Ps. 2, 7 ;
the second Psalm, Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten
Thee ; and in the ninth the title. Unto the end concerning Ps. 9,
the hidden things of the Son, a Psalm of David; and in the !!''®.
forty-fourth. Unto the end, concerning the things that shall 45, title.
""^ ^^ '
Well-beloved a song of My
Well-beloved touching vine- My
yard. My Well-beloved hath a vineyard ; is this Well- Who
^
beloved but the Only-begotten Son ? as also in the hundred ^
ayairri-
isfrom the father is a son and what is from the Father, but ;
that Word that went forth from the heart, and was born from
the womb ? for the Father is not Word, nor the Word Father ^ ;
but the one is Father, and the other Son and one begets, ;
^
ayaTrrjriis is explained by /uovoyer^s quoted by Wetstein in Matth. iii. I7.
by Hesychius, Suidas, and Pollux it ;
Vid. also Suicer in voc.
is the version of the Sept. equally with
d The
subject of Old Testament
jj.oi/oyev7]s of the Hebrew i n\ Homer evidence in favour of the title " Son,"
calls is continued in §§. 27, 28.
Astyanax'EKTopiSriv a.yanr)T6v ;
^ This doctrine
vid. also the instance of Telemachus, Nestorius considered
infr. p. 549 ; Plutarch notices this ; as the characteristic of Photinus.
supr.
"Ofj-ripos aya-n-orhv 6uoixd(fi jjlovvov V- ^06 init. Sabellius vloirdTopa dicit,
Photinus Koyoiraropa.
rriKvytTov, rovTtaTi fxr) ixov"^ enpov
yovivai, fxriTs e^ovcrt ytyivi/rj/xfuov, as
Subject VIII.
§.25.
Heretical illustration from 1 Cor. 12, 4. refuted.
is the same, but is dilated into Son and Spirit." Now this
^.Jt/I^'
^
isutterly extravagant ;
for if as with the Spirit, so it is with iTroard-
God, the Father will be Word and Holy Spirit, to one becoming p.*494,
0°*^ *•
Father, to another Son, to another Spirit, accommodating
bimself to the need of each, and in name indeed Son and Spirit,
but in reality Father only having a beginning in that He
* *
;
apxV.
'^
^'
becomes a Son, and then ceasing to be called Father, and
made man in name, but in truth not even coming among us;
and untrue^ in saying I and the Father, but in reality being 5
^^vU-
'^^""^
Himself the Father, and the other extravagances which.
result in the instance of Sabellius. And the name of the
Son and the Spirit will necessarily cease, when the need
has been supplied ;
and what happens will altogether be
but make-belief, because they have been displayed, not in
truth, but in name. And the Name of Son ceasing, as they
a Neander, Church Hist. vol. 2. p. thetrXarweTaL eix uibv /cai Trf/eC/ua which
277. understands this /xaiverai 5e Ka\ follows at once, and is the very ])hrase
of Sabellius. But the repe- of Marcellus. supr. p. 500. Athanasius
Xptl^ti-ivos
tition of yuaiVerai is somewhat against then does but say that the illustration
the supposition, and the oaa &\\a iirl from the gifts of the Spirit is a running
"Za^eXKiov which presently follows. So into Sabellianism. As to the want of a
too is the Ka.T avroi/s which occurs lower nominative to shew whom he is speaking
down the section. And the irpo7i\6ev of, it may be urged rather in proof of the
6 x6yos and the annihilation of creation abrupt and defective character of the
at its close, which have above been composition of the Oration,
ascribed to Marcellus. p. 507. (8.) And
544 If no Son, no baptismal grace, no creation.
Disc,
hold, then the grace of Baptism will cease too for it was ;
1
p 53g given in the Son *. Nay, what will follow but the annihilation
of the creation ? for if theWord came forth that we might
2
p. 316, be created ", and when He was come forth, we were, it is plain
p. 525,
^^^^ when He retires into the Father, as they say, we shall be
note b. no longer. For He will be as He was so also we shall not
;
That the Son is the Co-existing Word, argued from the New Testament.
Texts from the Old Testament continued; especially Ps. 110, 3. Besides,
the Word in Old Testament may be Son in New, as Spirit in Old
Testament is Paraclete in it. Objection from Acts 10, 36. urged by the
Samosatenes; answered by parallels, such as 1 Cor 1, 5. Lev. 9, 7. &c.
Necessity of the Word's taking flesh, viz. to sanctify, yet without de-
stroying the flesh.
our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have
handled of the Word of Life ; and the Life was manifested,
and we have seen it; and ice bear tvifness and declare unto
you that Eternal Life, which loas with the Father, and was
manifested unto us. While he says here that the Life, not
"
became," but was with the Father, in the end of his Epistle
he says the Son is this Life, writing. And we are in Him that John i 5,
is True, even in His Son, Jesus Christ ; this is the True God^^'
and Eternal Life. But if the Son is the Life, and the Life
was with the Father, and if the Son was with the Father, and
the same Evangelist says. And the Word teas with God, the John i,
**
Son must be the Word, which is ever with the Father. And
as the Son is Word, so God must be the Father. Moreover,
"
the Son, according to John, is not merely " God but Very
God; for according to the same Evangelist, And the Word
was God; and the Son said, lam the Life. Therefore the John \\,
Son is the Word and Life which is with the Father. ^"
begotten Son tchich is in the bosom of the Father, shews that ^• '
a Here apxh is used in the same sense too the mention of the Stoic doctrine in
as in the foregoing section, and seems §. 15. connects it with §. 14. And the
to connect it with the present, as the unusual word vTriaracns, which occurs
foregoing was connected with the pas- twice towards the end of this conclud-
sage before it by the mention of Bap- ing portion of the book, is found in the
tism. This is one out of several in- foregoing section, init. though on a dif-
stances which shew that the book, in- ferent subject. The connection of §. 12.
complete and ill- digested as it is, is no and §. 13. by the words ds inapov,
chance collection of fragments. Thus ainipws has been noticed in loc.
"
546 Explanation of From the womb," in Psalm 110, 3.
Disc, the Son was ever. For whom John calls Son, Him David
^
— IV,
^^r-
. .
note a. not forth Thy Right Hand out of Thy bosom ? Therefore if
12! Sept. ^^® Hand is in the bosom, and the Son
in the bosom, the
Son will be the Hand, and the Hand will be the Son, through
vid. Is. whom the Father made all Thythings ;
for it is written.
j)g\jj'
- Sand hath made all these things, and He led out His
8-
peoj^le xcith His Hand; therefore through the Son. And if
Ps. 77, this is the changing of the Right Hand of the Most Highest,
'
Ps! 45!^ ^^^ again. Unto the end, concerning the things that shall he
tit^e-
changed, a
song for My Well-beloved ; the "\Yell-beloved
then is the Hand
that has been changed concerning whom ;
" This
the Divine Yoice also says, This is Beloved Son. My
My Hand" then isequivalent to Son. This My
for that which has heart has womb also. Since then both
are human, we must deny both, or seek to explain both.
Now as a word is from the heart, so is an offspring from
the womb and as when the heart of God is spoken of,
;
p^55l
the way of man what is above man. Thus speaking of the
"• ^-
creation it says, Thi/ hands have made me and ^fashioned me,
.' ' -' '
Ps. 119, '
73. and. Thy hand hath made all these things,, and, He com-
148, 5. Suitable then is its language
inanded and they icere created.
" "
about every thing attributing to the Son
; propriety and
" and to the creation " the beginning of
genuineness,"
being." For some things God makes and creates ;
but Him
^ The " the "
by Athan. siders morning star to be the
parties opposed
understand the morning star literally. Star seen by the Magi, o <pepwv re Kot
our Lord being born at midnight, vvkt6s. 5r)Awv ri/xtpai/ to7s Mdyois. Euseb. p. 4fi,
infr. §. 28. and so TertuUian contr. b.
Marc. V. J). However, Marcellus con-
'*
Explanation of Before the morning star." 547
we too draw this from the womb but works we make by the ;
hand.
4. What means
then, say they, Before the morning star? §. 28.
I would answer, that if Before the morning star shews that His
birth from i^Iary was wonderful, many others besides have been
born before the rising of the star. What then is said so
wonderful in His instance, that He should record it as some
choice prerogative \ when it is common to many ? Next to
'
e'laipe-
the production of what exists. If then the term belongs to the Kara^o-
^^
let it be observed that He did not then receive a be-
000
body,
srinninar of generation when He was evangelized
'
o to the shep-
herds by night, but when the Angel spoke to the Virgin. And
i.
"p^^''"
yei/ecrews
that was not night, for this is not said on the contrary, it ;
last, the beginning and the end. Blessed are they who make
broad *=
their robes, that they may have right to the tree
of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers,
and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever maketh and
loveth a lie. I Jesus have sent My Angel, to testify these
Disc, and let him that is athlrst, Come; and whosoever tcill, let
of later date, let them who are thus disputatious, say where
in the Old Testamentmention made of the Spirit the
is
is later, and the distinction of the Holy Ghost as one and the
then and now hallowing and comforting them who are His
recipients as one and the same "Word and Son led even
;
*•
beginning icas the Word. And as the Spirit and Paraclete
are the same, so the Son and Word are the same and as the ;
14, 26. Saviour says concerning the Spirit, But the Paraclete ichich
is the Holy Ghost, ichom the Father ivill send in My Name,
flesh, and dwelt miong us, and tee beheld Sis glory, the
d A heresy of this kind is actually phets ;" and hence the frequent epithet
noticed by Origen, viz. of those qui given by S. Justin to the Holy Spirit
dicant of Tpo(pvTiK6v e.g. when speaking of
Spiritum Sanctum alium quidem ;
esse qui fuit in Prophetis, alium autem baptism. Apol. i. 61 fin. Also Ap. i. 6.
qui fuit in Apostolis Domini nostri
13. Tryph. 49. On the other hand, he
" the
Jesu Christi. In Tit. t. 4. p. 695. Hence calls the Spirit of the Prophet
in the Creed "who spake by the pro- Holy Spirit," e.g. Tryph. 54, fil.
" Well-beloved" the same as " 549
Only -he gotten."
beloved.
7. Someof the Samosatene school %distinguishing the Word §-30.
from the Son, pretend that the Son is Christ, and the Word
another and they ground this upon Peter's words in the
;
all^. For they say that since the Word spoke through Christ, •^^•
e For Paul's
opinions vid. supr. pp. John 8, '25. with J. C. Wolf's remarks,
174, 175. Tothepassages there brought, who would understand by apxT?" omnino,
distinguishing between him and Nesto-
which Lennep however in Phalar. Ep.
it can only mean with a negative,
rius, may be added the express words says
of the latter, Serm. 12. t. 2. p. 87. Our translation understands K6yos and
Mar. Mer. Assemani takes the same ^vVa as synonymous, (which is harsh,)
view, Bibl. Orient, t. 4. p. «8, 9. and the latter as used merely to connect
^
T'bvXSyoVj'bva.-KicmiXe ovtSs ((TTi . . the sentence; and ovtos as if for os.
. . ofSare rb yevSfjuvov priixa. The
Uiueis ^Moreover, if \6yos be taken for ^ri/xa,
Samosatenes interpreted this difficult rhv \6yov a.Tr4(TTei\( is a harsh phrase ;
construction as Hippolytus before them, however, it occurs Acts l.'i, 2G. 1( \6yos
as if rhv \6yov were either governed by on the other hand have a theological
Kara or attracted by uv, ovtos agreeing sense, a prima facie countenance is
" the
with & \6yos understood. Dr. Routh in given to the distinction between
loc. Hipp, who at one time so construed Word" and "Jesus Christ," wliich the
it refers to Pet. 2, 7- John 3, 34. as
1
Samosatenes wished to deduce from the
42. And so Urliem However, Athan. answers
parallel, also Matt.21, passage.
this inference in the passage which
quam statuo, &c.vid. Raphtl. inLuc. 21,
6. vid. also r^v apxh*" ''^'''' " "' ^''^^ ^l^"^" follows.
550 Samosatenes icrest Acts 10, 36 ;
true sense of it;
Disc
jy as in the instance of the Prophets, Thus saith the Lord, the
init. out any division of the Word, as when the inspired John says,
^oini,
^^^^ ^yr^ Word became flesh, and dwelt among us. What
3 ^
p. 341, then is said in a suitable and orthodox way by the blessed
Peter, the Samosatenes, understanding badly and wrongly,
stand not in the truth. For Christ is understood in both ways
1 Cor. \j^Divine Scripture, as when it says Christ God's power
and God's wisdom. If then Peter saj's that the Word was
sent through Jesus Christ unto the childrwi of Israel, let him
be understood to mean, that the Word incarnate has appeared
to the children of Israel, so that it may correspond to And
the Word
became flesh. But if they understand it otherwise,
and, while confessing the Word to be divine, as He is,
separate from Him the Man that He has taken, with which
g Paul of Samosata had argued in is a remarkable one, as shewing the
the same way against the divinity of historical connection between Samo-
Christ. Routh Relliqu. t. 2. p. 475- and satenes and Nestorians at Antioch.
Eusebius imputes it to Marcellus pp. Diodorus and Theodore fill up the inter-
55, a. 78, c. The passage that follows val between Atbanasius and Nestorius.
thought an incarnation must he an alteration of the Word.
551
also we believe that He is made one, saying that He has been Su^J-
'
sent through Jesus Christ, they are, without knowing it, con- r
tradictins: themselves. For those who in this place separate vid. r. 2.
^
the divine "Word from the divine incarnation, have, it seems, ^ooDaiv
not so perish the thought. For in the same way that John
; ^'rpoTv-j^v.
°''-
here preaches that incomprehensible oneness, the mortal being ^
'
h
avaKpaOeii. vid. note on Tertull. p. 8')7.immixtus Cassian. Incarn. i.
O. Tr. vol. i.
p. 48. and so ^ Kaivt] 5. commixtio Vigil, contr. Eutych. i,
fil^is, 0(6$ Koi ^rSpcoTTos. Greg. Naz. p. 494. (B. P. 1624.) permixtus August,
as quoted by Eulogius ap. Phot. Bibl. Ep. 137, 11 ut naturoe alteri altera
•
552 The Word teas made Man; not, icas separate from the Man.
Disc, other titles also have, as was natural, become the "Word's
portions. For that John has said, that in the beginning was
the Word, and He with God and Himself God, and all
things through Him, and without Him nothing made, shews
clearly that even man is the formation of God the Word.
'
p. 375, If then after taking him, when corrupted \ into Himself', He
renews here again through that sure renewal for our endless
*
^ia.ix.0- abidance ^, and therefore is made one with him in order to
p. 521,
raise him how can we possibly say that the
to a diviner lot,
note a. Word was sent through the Man who was from Mary, and
reckon Him, the Lord of Apostles, with other Apostles, I
»
oTToo-To- mean such as prophets who were sent ^ by Him And how !
*
4
^,;^^j
can Christ be called a mere man ? on the contrary, being
made one with the Word, He is with reason called Christ
and Son of God, the prophet having long since loudly and
* vTri- *
clearly ascribed the Father's subsistence to Him, and said,
vid. Acts -4;if/ I u-ill send Son My
Christ ; and in the Jordan, This is
3, 20.
j/"y Weil-beloved Son. For when He had fulfilled His promise.
He shewed, as was suitable, that He was He whom He said
He had sent,
*
p. 34. 11. Let us then consider Christ in both ways ^, the divine
6
lyow/xfv
Toy
-^y-Qj.^ made one in Mary with That which
•'
from Mary. For
is
•'
A07.
Oiiov, vid. in her womb Word fashioned for
the Himself His House, as at
the beginning He formed Adam from the earth or rather more
'
J 2, ;
misceretur. Leon. Serm. 23, 1. There ev, says Epiph. Ancor. 81 fin. and so
is this strong passage in Naz. Ep 101. Phot. Bibl. p. 831 fin. ov rf/s Kpdaeais
p. 87, c. (ed. 1840.) Kipvafxfvoiv wcrwep auyxvffiv avrcf Srj\ovcrr]s. Vid. also on
Twu (pvcTfwy ovTi} St) Koi Twv KXriffidiv, the word /ii|ij, &c. Zacagn. Monum. p.
Koi ireptx^povaeoi' €tr dXArjXas tu xSyoi xxi. —xxvi. Thomassin. de Incarn. iii.
T^s (TvfKpvia? ; Bull says that in using 5. iv. 15,
build the house and keep the city, in vain the builders toil,
and the keepers watch. And so the works of the Jews are
undone, for they were a shadow but the Church is firmly ;
off the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful 3 TOl/TOJy.
lusts, and taking up the new, which after God is created in Eph. 4,
the Holy Ghost, and again to the Jews, Jesus of Nazareth, a '^g.
.,^
Man approved of God for you, and again the blessed Paul to
the Athenians, By tJiat Man whom He hath ordained, giving 17, 31.
follows that what the blessed Peter says is orthodox and he '',
s
fi\,'Kpi-
from Mar}^, (perish the thought for how should he, who had !
jI^^^'iq
heard in so many ways, / and the Father are one, and He that -^o.
hath seen Me, hath seen the Father ? In which Man '", after 10 f,» 'oZ
2 {)
554 The Man is one Person with the Word.
Disc, the resurrection also', when the doors were shut, we know* of
IV
.
'
3
TO aVTO
verb,
',
^
...
His cominor to each pair of Apostles, and dispersing tj
all that
°TtV ^ spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see Me have. And He
abund. " or " this Man which I have taken to
^{^ not sav, This,"
^ " '
vi'd.
Wetstein eaten
before them, He took the remains and gave to them.
See now, though not as Thomas was allowed, yet bv another
way. He afforded to them full assurance, in being touched
by them you would now see the scars, learn from
;
but if
-111
jo
xovTos f. Saints
^
even perception of the Word
through the bod}^, as we
Kapdxcov . , , 1 1
?
ayiois, may by entering
consider, when the doors were shut and next ;
sacred
standing near them in the body and afibrding full assurance.
" r>
writers,
vid. I 13. So much may be conveniently said for confirmation of
the faithful, and correction of the unbelieving. And so let
'
].
v^. 36.
'
Paul of Samosata also* stand corrected on hearing the divine
S
not " Christ besides Me
""'
voice of Him who said My body,
^le.rhu who am the Word," but "If with
Me, and Me with It."
piar V
-p J ^j^^ "Word am the chrism, and that which has the
10
p. 248, . . .
note b. ;
p. 553. Me, and / came not of Mywlf, but the Father sent Me.
^'
"^°^ ^® ^^^ given the name of mission to the uniting
10^^42^'
Sq-uj/J with the Man, with which ^^ the Invisible nature might be
Conclusion. 555
He before ages from the Father, He too in the last times from
^
the Virgin invisible before even to the holy powers of heaven,
; p. 120,
°
visible now because of His being one with the Man who is ^'
2 o 2
INDEX OF TEXTS.
\_The Numbers stand/or the Pages.']
558 INDEX OF TEXTS.
1 SAMUEL.
INDEX OF TEXTS. 559
334 lii. 5. 75
23.
207 iiii. 4. 347, 444
111. 12.
6. 122
19. 28, 207, 350, 385, 493
134 7. 259, 3(»2
VII. 22, 23. 266
2G0 liv. 13.
viii. 10,11. 260
12. 140 Ivi. 4, 5.
491 Iviii. 9. 270
14.
12. 207
22. 20,22,47,115,257,281,
Ixi. 1. 247, 253
282, 306, 342, 343 twice 255
23. 199, 385 8.
xii. 5, 6. Sept.
485
20. 35
xiv. 16. 393
xviii. 1. 200
3. Sept. 398
XX. 23. 286
xxiii. 1 141
4. - 433
xxiv 3. 393
xxix. 7. Sept.
435
XXX. 11. 92
ECCLESIASTES.
vii. 10. 393
viii. 1. ib.
ISAIAH.
MICAH.
ST. MATTHEW.
vii. 18. 377
1.
23.
Hi. 17. J 9
ZECHARIAH.
INDEX OF TEXTS. 561
ST.
562 INDEX OF TEXTS.
xiv.
INDEX OF TEXTS. 563
2 CORINTHIANS.
i. 10. 419
ii. 11. 254
17. 450
iii. 1«, 17- 196
iv. 11. 34
V. 4. 551
15. 379
17. 32, 374
19. 406
21. 347
vi. 11. 529
12. ib.
xu. 2. 467
GALATIANS
564 INDEX OF TEXTS.
6. 149,238,267,314,372 2 PETER.
8, 10—12. 231, 263 twice
14.
INDEX.
Adam, his state before the fall, 379. ations, attempt to explain away
0.
Advance, Wisdom could not in wisdom, Only-begotten, 15. their own phrases
320, 473. the niiuiliooddid, for shew- unscriptural, 30, 133. their faith
ing forfh of Godhead, 475. modern, 78. early, expelled by St.
Ae/im, 81, \3G. Alexander, 94. and their letter to
Affections, men freed from by the St. Alexander, 96. like atheists, 131,
Lord's assumption of, 444. no longer 492. preferred caterpillar to Christ,
touch the body, 447. transferred to 100, 137- more deceitful than former
the Lord, 448. obliterated by, 449. heresies, 17'). should not be called
humpn, the Word annuls by receiv- Christians, 179. depend on the state,
ing, 520. 193. inconsistent in calling the Son,
Affections, the Word put on whole flesh God, 194, talk familiarly of divine
with, 44f>'. did not touch Him, ibid. things, 213. interpret Scripture ac-
He transferred to Himself, 448. He cording to their own canon, 257-
was not harmed by, 449. and carried, like Valentinus, (v. Valentinus,)
though without, ibid. v. Word. lack reason, 290. like Stoics, 297.
Ages, the Son the Creator of, 31, 127. like Paul of Samosata, (v. Paul.)
"Begotten before all" used in 3d urge Prov. 8. 22. 307. like Mani-
Sirmian, 83. chees, (v. Manichees.) called poly-
Agreement, one in, used in creed of theists, 422, 4!(2. their servility to
Dedication, 107. Constantius, 4.')9.
y4/earanrfer,S'/. evasions of Arians to,
307. Arians, confuted from notion of Fa-
All, the Son not one of, 208. |>ar- ther, Sabellians contrariwise, 517. \
take of Christ, 24G. the Father's, held Word to be notional. Son
the Son is, 49(5. real, other heretics vice versa,
Alterable, if the Son, not Image, 23!. 522. compared with heretics who
" the
Son, because rewarded for good held development of the Son, 525.
"
choice according to Arians, 234. the and Sabellians confuted by one text,
Son according to heretics, 52(J. 534. corajiared with Sabellians, 543.
566 INDEX.
Arian opinions, that our Lord was Become, how used of the Lord, 259. not
creature, 10. not really Word and used of Substance of the Word, 268.
Wisdom, 25, 186. "from God and Beget, what it means, 203. man
begets
"
Image used of the Son in same in time, God from eternity, 329. not
sense as of men, 26, 32, 34, 133, 179, used of creatures, 362. contrasted
182, 185. that Sou and Word were with created, 366.
but names, 131. the Son was not Beginning of wai/s, if the Word, then
before generation, 185, 214. that one of ways, 348. implies the Word
there were two Wisdoms, 227. com- to be no creature, 349. if so, more
pare the Word to the sun, 319. that than beginning, 350. the Father,
the Word is other than the Son, 332. of the Son, 363. of new creation
their notions of God material, 399. could not be mere man, 374. Wisdom
that Son was one Avith Father only in as havingimpressed Himself on
will, 415. held Son to be one with creatures, 391. as beginning of
Father by grace, 425. held our Lord wisdom to men, 395.
to be ignorant, 437- that the Son men first made, then, 365.
Begotten,
came from the Father's will, 485, not so the Son, 367.
hence conceive a habit in God, 493. Being, of the Son proper to Substance of
imply that the Son miglit not have Father, 402. is Godhead of the Father,
been, 495. held God to be first God 406.
then Father, 532. Better, not greater, used of our Lord
Arius, called Christ underworker, 13. his Heb. 1, 4. 260.
ThaUa, 26, 94, 332. expressly denies Blended, the Word with our first-fruits,
Oae in Substance, 95. his blasphe- 551.
mies, ib. re-admitted at Jerusalem, Bodily presence of Word, 295.
104. held Clirist to be One with the
Body, of Son capable of death, 243. of
Father by agreement, 145. his notion the Word, 244, 248, 467. God in, 298.
of creation, 316. the Church one in, 430. used by Him
Ariminum, v. Council. as instrument, 443. works proper to
Arm, name applied to the Word, 551 .
Word done through, ibid, was God's,
Artemas, 102. 444. not in appearance but in truth,
Article, Arian argument from omission 445. affections of, how proper to the
of, 101, 332. Word, 4 46, 477. passible, 478. of Christ
^^
As," not identity but ana-
signifies the Truth opposed to Jewish temple,
logy, 430. 553. V. Word.
Aaterius, called the Sacrificer, 13. the Body of man, made God, 380.
Sophist, 35, 100. emi)loyed by Eu- Brother, Arian blasphemy concern-
sebians, 101. his notion of Ingene- ing, 200. the Word our, as man,
rate, 225. of creation, 316. held tliat .367.
Christ was taught by the Father, 320.
quoted, 332. his inconsistency, 33G. C.
his explanation of "the Son in the
Father," 401. Cains, 82, 85.
Alhanasius, St. Christians did not take Canon of Scripture mentioned, 31.
his name, 181 .
Capable of the Word, the flesh ren-
Alhanasnis of Nazarbi, called Christ dered, 206. of Godhead, 365. ofim-
one of hundred sheep, 9!). mort ilify, men not naturally, 389.
Attributes of Son projier to Father, 404. Carpocrates held Angel-s to be framers
Angerus, 89. of world, 262.
" Carried our infirmities," commented
Auxentius, 82, 25.
on, 444.
Catechising, doctiint-s taught in, 328.
B. Cause efficient, creatures cannot be,
310, 4i0.
Cause and effect, the same, if Sabellius
Baptism, not into Creator and creature, right, 516.
I3{. form of, implies G.)dhead of Chrism, which anointed Christ was the
Son, 337. by Arians, 3 i9. form of, in Word, 654.
Son not ill Word, 538. none, if no Christ, became such or anointed for
Son, 544. our sakes, 251. we bear within us,
464. the will of God in, 4)i8. and
Basil, of Ancyra, not to be accounted
Arian, 139.
the Word one in incarnation, 550.
Basiliciis, 89, considered in two ways, 552.
INDEX. 567
Christians call themselves only after the Counsel, living, of the Father, the
name of Christ, 180. Word, 492.
Coexistence of the Son in the Father's Creation, divine act of, not to be di-
eternity, 439. vided, for essential, 12. compared
Coexisting Wisdom, 334. Word, 48, with Di\nne Generation, 17, 153.
412,519. implies Consubstantiality, 205. not a
Comprehension, the Son deficient in, thing to be learnt, 320. the Word one
according to Arius, 187- of the Son i3 with the Father in, 324. implies no
knowledge of the Father, 204. change in God, but in creatures, 532.
Complete, each Person of the Holy Creation, term applied to the Son as
Trinity, 400. man, 22. the, makes known the Word,
Condescension, 354, 3G8, 372, 391, 394, 196. could not be eternal, 223. none
396, 550. without Son, 283. the Word would
Confession, third <.f Sirmium, 83. first have e.xisted though none, 323. used
of Antioch, 105. of the Dedication, in Scripture for renewal, 340. not to
106. of Theophronius, 108. fourth of be used of the Word, 347- supported
Antioch, 110. Macrostich, 111. first by Son when brought into being, 372.
of Sirmium, 118. second of Sirmium, in servitude, 496. close of at return of
122. of Seleucia, 123. of Nice, 125. cf Word, if created to create, 527. no
Antioch, 12G. dilatation at, 530. annihilated if no
Connatural, the Son with the Father, Son, 544.
148. implies One in substance, 154. Creature, but not as creature used by
Constans, called most pious emperor, early .Iriaiis, 97, 307. means nothing
59. proposed insertion of One in sub- for aU creatures differ in kind, 308.
s-ance (in Eusebius's letter), fil. of the whole Word not to be called a,
blessed memory, 1 10. 347- could not join us to Creator, 377-
Constanline, his speech at Nicsea, 65. Creature, Arians worship two Gods, one
Conslantius, his reason for calling a Creator the other, .301, 423.
Council, 74. present at the Dedi- Creatures, if the Lord one of differs but
cation, 109. puts forth an edict in degree, 313. many but the Word
against second Sirmian confession, one, 318. each of, one in substance
123. banishes orthodox Bishops, 125. but inadequate, 319. each kind of,
baptized at the point of death, 127- created together, 349.
"
his letter to the Bishops at Ariminum, Created," to be interpreted according
to subject matter, 285.
" Created to
158. flattered by Arians, 193, 439.
Consulate, date of, attached by Arians create," how absurd, 316. if so He
to their formula of faith, "iG. for us not we for Him, 321. not ne-
Dionysius of Alexandria quot^'tl, 44, Expression, the Son, 48. the Son of Fa-
142. ther's attributes, 150. of Father, 204.
Dionysius, S. of Rome, quoted, 45. of His subsistence, 209, 327.
writes to reprove Bp. of Alexandria, External, the Word not to us, 359,
142. Exucontians, name applied to Aca-
Doctors, Catholic, agree with each cians, 127.
other, 8.
Doctrine, theological, not completed by
additions, 200. F.
Doctriyie, master, 298.
Doctrines, novel, are false, 191. Face of Godhead one, 154, 403, 422,
Drift of Scripture, 290, 440. 424. of Father the Son, 406.
Duality of Substance, if Word not Faith, Catholic, one from the beginning,
from, but joined to Father, 517. 78.
Dyarchy, 513. Faithful, how applied to God, 289.
Father, God the Father, called In-
generate, 13. Impassible, 19. was
Father from everlasting, ibid, im-
E. plied in production of the VV'ord, 27. not
other than substaih-e, 38. everlasting
Easter, question of, settled at Nicaea, 75. implies everlasting Word, 192. called
Ecclesiastical sense, 242. scope, 482. Fountain of Wisdom, 207. proper to
Economy, human, of the Son, 264, 294, the Shi, 208 to be properly Father
29fi. opposed to Substance of Word, is not Son, 212. needed no instrument
353. prepared before beginning of to create, 217- analogy of human
world, 388. fathers to, 219. not adventitious to
Elisha, instance of, 468. God, 222. eternally Maker in posse,
Embodied presence of the Saviour, 258. but Father in actu, 22.'1. better so
Emperor convokes council, 73. called called than Ingenerate, 228. not all-
eternalby Arians, 77- sufficient, if theSon notOne,3ii7. God
Emperor, image of, 405. ours by grace not by nature, 36(5.
Equality of Son with Father is unity, where named, the Son also named,
148. to the Spirit in respect of God- 338. pervades all in the Son, acts in the
head, 253. Spirit, 422. does not lose by giving to
Eternals, two. Catholics reproached by Son, 452. His Subsistence by His plea-
Arians with holding, 439. sure, 494. Substance of attacked, if the
Evagrizis, 89. Son attacked, 495. generative by na-
Endoxius, 74, 89, 111, 134. ture, ibid, accession of power to, if
Euphration, 99. the Son begotten to create, 526. if
Eusebians, dispute with Catholics, 1 . God, then the Word is Son, 532.
signed at Nicaea the terms to whirh Father, if compounded, then His own
they afterwards objected, 6. insisted Father, or else Word a mere name,
on Prov. 8, 22. 29. remained quiet 514. not a mere name for God con-
after their conviction at Nicjea, 3i). sidered as wise, ibid, is Father and
"
misinterpret the phrase From God," the Son is Son, therefore two Persons,
32. and other phrases, 34. by their 516. dilated into Father, Son, and
fraud compel Council to frame term-:, Spirit, according to heretics, 528. be-
57. their blasphemies, 99. intrude came flesli, if dilatation at Incarna-
themselves on churches, 103. incon- tion, 530. becomes Son and Spirit
sistent in being indignant with other according to Sabellius, 543.
heretics, 522. Fatherhood, earthly shadow of heavenly,
Eusebius of Nicomedia, 99, 234. 215, 496.
Eusebius of Cm^area, recants in a letter Fathers, what not from is
apostasy,
to his Church, 6. his letter, 59. re- 191.
ceives " of the substance," 62.
" one Fear could not be in the
Word, 477.
in substance" for peace-sake, ibid, his Fire, light from, 515. radiance and,
blasphemy, 99. 524.
Eutychius, 89. First does not exclude the Son, 407,
Euzoius, 127. 412.
Exalted, the Son not, when He became First-born the Word, as our brother,
man, 235. human nature of Son, 238. 366. of new creation the Word, 367.
the Word for our sakes, 521. opposed to Only-begotten, 368. be-
Exercises of Or i gen, 48. cause in Him creation came to be.
INDEX. 569
370. of creation excludes creation, Given, all things to the Son, does not
ibid, as supporting creation, iu impair His Godhead, 452.
creating, 372. from the dead, 374. Glory of God in us, the Word, 415.
yet Only, 412. God from God, 193, 512.
Flesh, enslaved to sin, put on bv the Go<t, never wordless and wisdomless,
Word, 241. God in, 2J6. of Christ 25, 516. simple and uncompounded,
real, 381. ministered to Godhead, 37. name of, means divine substance,
444. infirmities of, borne by the Word, 38, 132. isHis own substance, 131.
ibid, whole put on by the Word, 446. unity of, for Son from Father, 154.
made the Word, 448. made God in a body, 298. of compound nature
through Incarnation, 455, 475. pos- if attribute wisdom really e.xist in,
sessed by God in the Word, 453. very 331. Christians full of, 432. the flesh
God in, and true flesh ia the Word, made, 455, 475.
ibid. Godhead, substantial, 151. the Father's,
Forgiveness might have been without Rom. 1, 20. used of the Son, 197. of
Incarnation, though not renewal, 378. the Father and Son the same, 245,
Form of Godhead, 40'>. 207, 304. identity of, 403. paternal of
Foujitain applied to the Father, 20, Son, 436. dwelt in flesh, 443. works
24, 400. never barren, 202. begetteth of, through flesh, 446. prerogatives of,
from itself and implies eternity of the derived eternally from Father to Son,
Son, 2I»7. 451. of the Son is the Father's, 404,
"Founded" used of human nature, of 453. advance of manhood for shining
Word, 387. forth of, 475. oneness of, 478.
Free-choice, creatures attached to God Gods, Arians near holding two, 423.
by, 519. we so called by grace, 236, 427, 433.
Free-icill of the Son, Arian question we become through Incarnation, 348,
concerning, 214, 231. the Son has 381, 446, 447, 45(;.
not human, 255. Grace, given by all Three Persons to-
gether, 338. one and the same from
Father and Son, 417-
Greater, used of things one in nature,
264.
Greek notion of creation, 132.
P
670 INDEX.
Himnelf, the Word bare our sins, 359. Impassibility of the Word, 448. of man
Homer, quoted, 549. through Incarnation, 449.
Homoousion v. Substance. Impress, of Wisdom in the Works,
Humanity some terms in Scripture re-
,
394.
ferrible to the Lord's, "iSC. Improvement, none in the Word, 26,434.
Humanly, the Lord said to advance, "In the Father," in what sense the
473. Son, 400.
Incarnate, presence of the Word, v.
Word.
Incarnation, in order to sanctify the
flesh, 296. had not been but for man,
356. necessary for renewal, 379, 446.
man had not conquered Satan with-
out, 380. and had remained mortal,
Idea, Christ Son in, according to Arians, 381. and corruptible, 432. if not of
193. ideas of men successive, 321. the Word, through body, men had not
Identity, of Son with Father, 40. been redeemed, 446. men immortal
of light, ibid, ought to be used of through, 447. passions abolished in
substances, 155. of Godhead, 403. of the Impassible through, 449. took
what the Son hath, 451. of nature, place to make grace irrevocable, 455.
431. V. Word.
JeremiaJi, hallowed from the womb, Incarnation no dilatation at, 530. the
446. Word, Son before, 539. the ancients
Jesus, said to have advanced, not the called sons before, ibid. Christ and the
Word, 475. Word one in, 550. no division of the
Jews, thought Christ said He was the Woi-d by, ibid, no alteration of the
Father, 533. Word in,551. proved by what took
Ignalius, St., quoted, 14fi. place after resurrection, 545. the Word
Ignorance, our Lord's according to whole man and God together in, ibid.
Arians, 437- questions do not always Inclination, two ways, implied in choice,
imply, 454. proper to flesh, not to 490. and in God by Arians, 495.
Godhead, ibid, ours carried by the Incommeasurable, creatures with the
Son for our sakes, 455. Son, 264.
Ignorant, our Lord not of the Day of Incorporate, we with the Body of the
Judgment, 4C0. as man, because ig- Word, 367.
norance natural to man, 461. not as Indivisibility of the Son from the
Word, because Holy Spirit not, 402. Father, 406, 419. guards unity, 524.
not, because Image of Father, 403. Inferior, the Lord to the Spirit in re-
the Lord said He was, to shew His spect of manhood, 252.
manhood, 464. put on a flesh which Ingeneraie, as used by Arians, 13, 53.
was, 405. not, though He said He originally a heathen term, 51. not used
was, as St. Paul, 467. humanly for in opjiosition to Son, 54. different
our profit, 409. senses of, 52, 146, 225. used of the
Illustrations, Scripture adapted to our Son, 147. Arian question whether one
imperfection, 326. human, used by
or two, 214, 225. is but one, but the
Arians, 491. Son not therefore generate, 226. in
Image, implies Offspring, 28. of One opposition to creatures, 228. Wis-
God must be One, 27, 331. One in sub- dom, 334.
stance, 35, 40. eternity of, in extract Ingenerately, the Son coexi.sts, S32, 336.
from Origen, 48 and 440. unvarying Inseparable, the Son from the Father,
used in Creed of Dedication, 107. 406, 419, 429, 440.
imphes Substance, 130. to be true Instrument, the Son not, 40, 321, 382.
must be perfect, 210. implies eternity, body of tlie Word used by Him as,
ibid, and Son imply each other, 283. 443, 450.
One only, 318. unvarying, 327, 405, Invisible seen through visible, 553, 555.
INDEX. 571
Legates of Roman see, 86. through but in the, 551. the, made
Leonthis, 8!}, 13(>. One with God the Word, 554. whole
Life, the Son so called, 20, 48, 400. if ojieration of Godhead through, 555.
so He is the Word, 545. the Word V. Word.
Very, 551. Manichees find fault with the Law,
Light expresses Immaterial generation 130. Arians comjiared to, 214, 33(>.
of the Son, 20; identity of, 40. of the tlieir baptism, 340. held more than
Father in the Son no other than the one Origin, 421. deny generation of
Son's substance, 41. oneness of, 404, the Word's body, 450. held God to
417. of the Father the Son, 474. from be ignorant, 471. reject Old Testa-
fire, 515. ment, 541.
Light from Light, in fourth confession Manifestation, further of Godhead
of Antioch, 110. in Macrostich, 112. meaning of advance, 474.
in first of Sirmium, 118. Marcellus of Ancyra anathematized,
Light, One, Father and Son, 404, 417. 109.
Like found inadequate, 35. expresses Marcion, 46. held two Gods, 153. held
external similitude, 40. and "'Like more than one origin, 421.
in all things," 84. in Macrostich, Maris, 99, 109.
115. in all things but substance in- Mark sent into Gaul, 110.
volves two Gods, 150. in all things, Murtinian the notary, 123.
210, 237, 305. in all points, 311. the Martyrius, 111.
Father, 428. Martyiy, Church of at Jerusalem, 103.
" Like " in 3d Mother of the Lord's body,
according to Scripture Mary, St.,
Sirmian, 83. in Creed of S^leucia, 290. Ever Virgin, 381. Mother of
124. and of Constantinople, 125. v. God, 420, 440. the Baptist leaped at
Substance. voice of, 447 mortal, therefore the
Likeness, same in, 35. unvarying, 40, Lord mortal, 478, 551.
451. oneness of, 145. applied to Material, notions of Arians, 399. about
quality rather than substance, 155. etHuence, 19, 211, 212. and severance,
in doctrine, no likeness at all, 41fi. in 03.
substance alone true, 135, 203. of the Matter not eternal, 311.
Father, 144, 327, 350, 403. natural Maxiniilla, 78.
of the Father, 452. Mediator, Ai-ian sense of, 13. none be-
Likeness in Suljslance, 13G, 200, 210, tween Father and Son, 41. why must
210, 416, 421, 436. denied at Se- have been God, 151, 301, 307, 377-
leucia, 124. rejected by S. Ath. as the Word not between the Father and
implying participation, 156. creation, 317- must be God and Man,
Logomachy, Arian, 157. 381, 446. and more than man, 537-
Lord, hov/ Christ made, 208. over the Meletian, 89.
disobedient, 300. how the Son calls Ministry, not needed by Creator, 315.
the Father, 351. opposed to creation, 3!{). of flesh in
Lordship of the Father, the Son one the Lord, 444. human of the Lord,
with, 4!)3. 462.
2 1' 2
572 INDEX.
Minister, the Word doth to us, 520. 406. in whom others made sons, 413.
Miracles, done by the Word through His of Substance, the Son because giver
flesh, 445. of grace, 417- from the Father pre-
Mission, used of Incarnation, 553. of the serves Unity of Godhead, 517.
" Once the Son was
Word, His presence in the flesh, 555. not," an Arian for-
Monarchy, Divine, 45. because one mula, 195.
" One
origin of Godhead, 513. Only God" excludes idols, 410.
Mnntanns taught a new revelation, 78. One, the Father and Son not as one
Moral excellencies of man imitations of thing twice named, 403. light, Father
God, 427. and Son, 404. not in will but Sub-
stance, 416. not as we are one, 426.
*
Morning Star,' heretical explanation
of, 54f>. by nature, we by imitation, 429.
One, divine and human works done by,
450. Christ and the Word in Incarna-
tion, 550, 555.
N. One, the Divine, 515. became a Three
by dilatationaccording to heretics,
Name, the Son not Word, &c. only in, 528. becomes Father, Son, and
25, 210, 307, 333, 514, 527, 542. Spirit, or else besides Father, ac-
Names of heretics derived from their cording to the same, 529. with Fa-
teachers, 180. ther, that alone which is from Him,
Narcissus, 99, 109. 633. dilates into four, if the Word
Natural possession, applied to the Son, not Son, 538.
41. Oneness, symbolical of, 144. of the
Nature of the Son towards the Father, Lord, not in agreement but in Sub-
155. of the Son is the Father's, stance, 148. of nature, 151. of Christ
245. transcends will, 234, 489. of with Father, 335. indivisible, 337,
the Father and the Son one, 264, 429. of Substance, 403. of giving,
403. peculiarity of, 404. indivisible, shews oneness of nature, 418. of
429. the Son in the Father by, 432, Godhead, though Father and Son are
434. human of the Word, 4(J0. in- two, 513. consists in that the Son is
visible seen through visible, 555. of in the Father, and the Father in
God double, if the Word not Off- the Son, 534.
spring, 517- human, the Manhood Oneness, divine in incarnation, 551.
transcended by degrees, 475. Only -begotten, why the Son, 19. op-
Nature of the Son towards the Father, posed to first-born, 308. and Well-
155. of the Word unalterable, 253. beloved the same, 641, 549.
the Word in His, not a creature, Only-begotten, Arian sense of, 15. God,
345. the Son so called by Arius, 96.
Necessity, the Son not by, 489. Only and One God does not exclude
NiccEa, Council to have been held there, the Son, 407. does not interfere with
73. V. Council. First, 412.
Notionally Word, Christ according to Organ of Wisdom, the Manhood, 475.
Arians, 332. the same called Father Origen, called labour-loving, 48.
and Son, heretical, Slfi. the Word Origin, not three because of the Trinity,
according to Arians, Son according 46, 421. none of the Son's existence,
to other heretics, 522. the Word not, 48. the Father of the Son, 201, 3C3,
527. V. Name, 513. the Son of our salvation, 250.
two if the Word subsist by Himself,
516.
Orthodox, the drift of Scripture, 290.
O.
Seleucia, Council called there, 74, 82. according to Sabellius, 510, 529. in-
1 60
Bishops at, 88. deposes the Arians, divisibly from tlTe Father, preserves
89. puts forth Homcean creed, 123. unity of Godhead, 524. whatever exists
forbids "Substance," 124. from another is His, 532. if a work
Semi-ariatis, not to be accounted God began to be Father, ibid.
Arians, 139. inconsistent, 141. called Son and Vv'ord
separated by heretics,
"much loved," ibid, are in danger 531, 549. the man assumed by Christ
of introducing two substances, 150. held to be by some, 531. or the man
Servant, used in Scripture of sons, 285. and theWordunited,ibid.orthe Word
the Word not, 300, 351. became, when became Man, ibid, if
Shew His manhood, Christ said He everlasting must be the Word, 532.
was ignorant in order to, 404. superior to Word, if not the same,
Siras, 89. 534. and the Word if not tlie same,
" John 5, 20. argument from, then there are two worlds, 536. if the
So,'^ in
452. man assumed by the Word and not
Son, twofold sense of the word, 11. the Word is, then man is God, 537.
implies oneness of nature with Fa- sight of the Father ascribed to not to
ther, 28. implies "Of the Sub- the Word, 538. if the flesh and the
stance," 33, 202. has not a human Word together are what follows, 539.
sense, 40. completes Word, 141. if the Word became, when made!Man,
guards against notion of two Gods, then knew not the Father till then,
200. even in the case of men implies 540. mentioned in Old Testament,
connaturality, 220. and Image imply 541 and the Word equivalent, 542. if
.
each other, 283. implies likeness, Life, must be the Word, 545. if not
304. not a name taken from creatures, mentioned in Old Testament neither
333. implied in father, 407. bow im- is Paraclete, 548.
plies the Monarchy, 513. not a mere Sons, we truly made, 56. human not
name for God when Wisdom, 514. co-existent by accident of nature,
notional according to some heretics, 219. not external to thtir fathers, ib.
522. the Saints in Old Testament called,
Son, our Lord not by advancement, 11. 541, 548.
not created to create others, 12. not Sotades, 94, 179.
in a way that admits of degrees, 15. Spirit, Holy, all partake of Christ
^' re-
by nature, IC. His generation im- through Him, 42, 192, 203.
INDEX. 575
"
poses in God in extract from S. 524, 527. used before Nicene Coun-
Dionysius, 4!>. the Son the Dispenser cil, 43. com))lained of at Seleucia,
of, 247. speaketh not of Itself but 89, 1-4. forbidden by 2d Sirmian
given by the Word, 249. of the Son Confession, 122. and at Constanti-
fitly given by Him, 253. blasphemy nople, 126. not to be rejected because
against, is ascribing the work of the some otfended, 131. expresses geim-
Word to the de\a], 252. intercession ineness of Son, 133. not to be re-
of, 300. called God's Gift, 305. of jected because not in Scripture, 137.
the Son necessary to becoming son, not obscure, 138. guarded by Word,
365. the Father acts in through the 140. implied in Radiance, Offspring,
Word, 422. held to be from nothing and Son, 140, 148. not to be taken
by Arians, ibid, cause of our being in materially any more than Offspring.
God, 433. hath whatever He hath 141. involves no prior substance, 151.
from the Word, 434. grace of, how does not imply a whole and parts,
irrevocable, 435. not ignorant, much 152. implied in coniatural, 154.
less the Son, 4(J2. grace of, used for guards against two Gods, ibid, does
heretical illustration, 5-13. comforted not imply parts and divisions, 202.
the Saints in the Old Testament, 548. £ii/ce in, not so extensive as
Stoics, heretics borrowed from, 297, 528, in Substance," ibid, used, 416.
531. Like according to, not equi-
Subordinate, Son to the Father in valent to " Like in Substance," 139.
Macrostich, 113 and 1st of Sirmium, involves participation, 156.
121. 2d of Sirmium, 122. Unlike in, what follows if
Subservient, Son to the Father in 1st Creating Word, 205.
Sirmium creed, 118. Substantive Wisdom, the Son so called,
Subsistence, in extract from Origen, 48. 14 1, 320. substantial Godhead, 151.
forbidden at Constantinople, 124. energy, 284. Word, 514.
"three in" used in creed of Dedica- Sun and painting, comparison of, 410.
own Expression,
tion, 107. implies Its
209, 327. invisible, 399. joined to Sub-
stance, 494, 514. One in, 543. of
Father ascribed to Son ,552. One ac-
cording to SabeUius, 543. of the Word
not to be separated from the Man
from Mary, 553. Temple of God, Christ's body, 474.
Subsistences, three opposed by St. Dio- Temple, Jewish, is Image, Christ's
nysius, 45. asserted by Arians, body, the Truth, 553.
98. Terms, human, change when used of
Substance, of God, is Himself, 38. of God, 285.
the Word, the same as light which Terror, not lawful to say that the Lord
is in Him, 41. of the Son, if alien in- was in, 479. of the Saviour removed
volves alien God, 150. of the Father, our terror, 481.
the Son proper to, 191, 209, 2G4, 312. Testament, Old, the Son named in,
participated wholly, 203. of the
Fa- 541, 548.
ther, Son one in nature to, 2G4. of the Texts commented on,
Word, not exalted, 238. no defect in, Gen. 32, 31. 154, 424
244. divine not barren, 284. nor Deut. 32, 6. 364
made, 290. faithful not used accord- 39. 410
•
no precedent, 48(). the Son not to be made externally, 516. if another be-
measured hj', 4!)0. if the Son by, so sides Christ, Christ only called Word,
also God exists and is good, ibid, of 518. separated from Son by heretics,
the Father, the Son is, 4'.)l. and Un- 531. became Son when became Man
derstanding the same in God, 493. the according to heretics, ibid, if from God,
Father's subsistence not from, there- then Son, 532. the Son, if everlasting,
fore not the Son, 494. the Son not must be, ibid, not Father therefore
without though not from, ibid, by the Son, ibid, is Father, if the Man not
same as the Father's, the Son wills Word, 537. if the flesh is the Son,
the Father, ibid. " He came to be of" because of, then the Word is the Son,
implies that the Father could have 539. nothing but a name, if not Son
not willed the Son, 495. till He became Man, 540. coming
Wisdom, Christ is properly not in name, forth from the heart is the Son, 542.
25. implies oneness in substance, 40, and Life the Same, 545. and Son
312. considered as an attribute by paralleled with Spirit and Paraclete,
Arius, Ifid. implies eternity of the 548. differs from the Son and Christ
Son, 207- immateriality of divine according to heretics, 549. no altera-
generation, 221. Arians held two tion of in incarnation, 551.
wisdoms, 227. of God needed no Word, not made servant, 350, 351.
teaching, 320. in substance, ibid. One whole not to be called creature, 347-
because God One, 331. coexisting no hurt to from passion, 444. human
with God not Himself, 334. how affections did not touch, 446. not
created in the works, 390. of God harmed by affections, 449. carried af-
archetype of ours, 391. the Very, fections, though without them, ibid,
ibid. 393. Itself, not its impress in properties of to be separated from
Incarnation, 396. could make no those of Man, 450. did not advance,
advance in
wisdom, 472. substantial, but Jesus, 475. affections not proper
513. no quality in God, 515. to, fear could not be in, 479. hungers
Wise, Wisdom from the, 514, the not hungering, 521. God and Man,
Father, the Son Mlsdom, 524. 555.
Womb, from the, explained, 542, 546. Word, put on the flesh enslaved to sin,
Word, human, paralleled with Divine, 241. body of, capable of death, 243.
140. composed of syllables, 329. flesh of 244, 248. incarnate presence
image of divine, 391. of, 190.252,357, 385, 450, 555. visita-
Word, Christ is properly, not in name, tion of, in flesh, 264. suffered in body,
25. of God is One, 26. implies Son, 267. bodily presence of, 258, 295,
27. alone really from the Father, 375. fleshly presence of, 289. was
33. implies One in substance, 40. God in flesh, 296. body of, 368. im-
God never without, 47, 202, 208, 215, perfect body round perfect, 375. pro-
516, 530. not pronounced, 113, 119, perties of flesh said to belong to, 443.
329. not a name but substance, 131. infirmities of flesh borne by, 444.
impassibility of divine generation, passion of, 445. flesh net external
140, 221. considered as an attribute to, put on whole flesh, 446.
ibid,
by Arius, 186. another besides Son body was His not another's, ibid, af-
according to Arius, ibid, implies fections of flesh appropriated by, 447.
eternity of the Son, 207- not anointed, suffering by nature proper to flesh of,
as Word, but as having assumed 449. the flesh possessed by, 455. ig-
Flesh, 248. implied in act of creation, norant as man, 461. put on flesh
284. not made qua Word, 291. not that was ignorant, 465. professed
made servant, 300. if not Creator ignorance humanly, 469. was God
there must be another, 310. implies bearing flesh, 4/2. humanly said to
" of the
Substance," 312. One because advance, 473. for manifestation of
God One, 331. not so called because Godhead, 475. body of, corruj)lible,
of things rational, 333. if creature, 478. made flesh, 5d0. no division of,
could not have redeemed, 380. Words, in incarnation, ibid, sent through
two, if Arians right, 488. and a series Christ means Word incarnate, ibid,
of, 492. everlasting because from one with the Man from ^lary, 551,
God, 517. 553. perception of througli body,
Word, not a sound but substantial, 513. 554. Himself is Christ Son of Mary,
not as man's, 514. if not substantial, 555.
then the Father compounded, ibid. Word used His body as instrument,
Very, if the Father is, then His own 443, 450. works projier to, done
Father and Son, ibid, a creature, if through His body, ibid, miracles
578 INDEX.
done by through the flesh, 445. per- to, 448. if received gifts as Word,
mitted His body to hunger, 477- men not benefited, 457.
death of, by His own will, 482. Wordless, 25, 516. v. Word.
blended with our first-fruits in in- Works, for the, implies economy, 353.
carnation, 551. not sent through the Work incompatible with Son, 283. as
Man from Mary, but He in Hira being judge, 288. God without if
sent Apostles, ibid, seen in opera- without Son, 518.
tion of Godhead through body, 555. Working of Son is Father's, 416.
Word men filled with righteousness Worship paid by creatures to God, 313.
of, 444. men knit into, 447- the paid to Emperor's image, 40fi.
flesh made, ibid, men made proper Worship the creature, Arians, 301, 423.
INDEX
TO FOOT NOTES AND MARGINAL REFERENCES.
The Letter or Figure, wliich follows the number of the Page, stands for
the Note or Reference respectively.
evangelical, ibid, mortal but not to die, Archetype, the Son is of our sonship, 15,
3fi9, b. could not keep grace, 455, 4. f. 5G, k. 140, n. God is of creatures,
Adoptionists, 300, b. 4«2, b. 4G6, g. 18, o. the Word and Wisdom, 29, k.
Advancement of Christ, IG, i. 25, f. 140, n. 333, t. 373, s. Father and
^ons, 30, n. 198, e. Valentinian, 97, h. Son of those relations, 151, z. 153,2.
48(>, h. 531, a. 211, f. 215, 1. 41G, e. God is of all
Aetius, first spoke plainly what Arius perfection, 220, d.
held secretly, 10, u. his history, 13(), Arianism, a state religion, 2, c. 4, h. 77f
h. called atheist, 81, 3. 184, k. m. 190, c. 193, 5. 34], 1. anticipation
Ages, 30, n. 108, 1 195, a. 198, e. 199, 3.
. of in 3d cent., 47, 1. caused disorders,
Agnoetce, 295, o. 4G2, d. 75, h. stationary period of, 1
10,q. fore-
Analogy, principle of, 431, y. 432, z. runner of Antichrist, 178, 1. 188, 3.
Angels, sins of, 251, e. worshipped, &c. doctrinal connection with Apollina-
by Gnostics, 2(i2, f. 417) g. considered rianism and Eutychianism, 289, h.
creators by Gnostics, 310, h. not to 292, n. opposed to ApoUinarianism
be addressed in stead and in dis- historically and ethically, 292, n.
paragement of our Lord, 417, g. fhe Arians, chameleons, 2, c. atheists, 3, f.
medium through which the Son 25, 1. 184, k. 492, 2. diabolical, 9, s.
was wont to shew Himself, 120, g. 49, 1. 410, a. mad, 2, e. 25, 2. 91, q.
418, h. 177, 1- 189, 2. 202, 4. 21f;, G. 231, 2.
Anomaeans, did but profess pure Arian- &c. foes of Christ, G, n. passim, not
ism, 84, b. 10, u. 12, x. 25, f. 114,b. Christians, 27, h. 85, 1. 1/9, 4. 183, 4.
only partially known to Athanasius, 194, 2. 439, 3. profuneness of, 75, h.
51, a. 128, h. differ from Arius as to 213, a. 234, 2. few in number, m, s.
KardXTj^is, 9G, f. Said God could be hypocrites, 127, g. the giants, 459, 2.
perfectly known by us, 9G, f.
directly modern Jews, 282, a. like heathen
opposed, not Catholics, but Semi- polytheists, 301, c. 423, n. 492, 3.
arians, 12G, c. said that Catholics serpents, dogs, wolves, &c. 341, h.
oughttoholdourLordas not Sonof the Arians, attack the Nicene definition,
580 INDEX TO FOOT NOTES AND MARGINAL REFERENCES.
teach that our Lord is not the true Ariomaniacs, 91, q. whence the title,
Son of God, yet not a son like us, 2, e. 91, q. 183, i. 191, c.
10, u. that H*^ is in one sense true Arius, his letter to Eusebius, 1, a. he
Son, 108, 1. 307, d, misinterpret the copied from Asterius. 13, 2. vid. also
term Son, 24, b. misinterpret the 35, 1 (where Tillemont reads Trap
term Word, 26, g. attempt to con- avTov Note 21. on Arians.)
for Trpo.
sider our Lord neither God nor his Thalia, 94, a. acknowledged at
creature, 10, u. 224, a. 423, m. hold the Council of Jerusalem, Ui3, u. his
two Gods, 63, g. 118, m. loO, y. character and person, 183, i. main-
423, m. or worship whom they call a tained that the Son could alter,
creature, 191, d. 206, 301, c. 411, b.
1. 230, a.
real Son, 307, d. 332, s. not really ly mentions the Homoiision in his
Word and Wisdom, 25, f. the Word Orations, 17, ni. 157, i. 210, d, e. 262,
notionally, 332, s. not Word, but f. 264.
g. acknowledges the Semiarians
so called, 25, f. 307, d. not a true as brethren, I7, m. 157, i- seems not
Son but so called, 41,3. 218, m. 307, to know the Acasians well, 7, p. uor
d. 333, u. one of many words, 26, g. the Anomoeans, 51, a. 128, h. how far
331, q. 336, b. one of many powers, learned, 52, d. 146, 1. 225, 2. whether
134, 1. as the locust, 137, 1. 186, at Council of Seleucia, 73, b. his
1. created by true Word and Wis- change of tone towards Constantius,
INDEX TO FOOT NOTES AND MARGINAL REFERENCES. 581
90, p. does not know the Semiarians torians, 267, !• 443, g. by Eutychians,
as well as S. Hilary, 103, t. dis- 267, 1.
put to death, buried, &c. 444, i. yet to be used as such, ibid, heresy of
not affected in His Godhead by rejecting them, ibid. 431, y. partial,
the incarnation, 2!)5, o. 444, k. 4;J9, c.
combines the energies of each nature Condescension, of our Lord at creation,
in single acts, (the deai^SinK-)! ivipydia) is not generation, 368, g. 396, i. con-
Christ, took our fallen flesh, 241, h. He creates, 32, q. 372, q. 391, 5. in
had sinless infirmities of the flesh, making Himself an archetypal Son
448, z. His flesh our renovation, to creation, 32, q. 246, a. 373, s.
250, d. 360, g. 374, t. 447, u. 440, a. Confession, of the Dedication, 89, o.
permitted and suspended at will the 106, b. of the Macrostich, 1 1 1, t. first
operations of His manhood, 477, a. of Sirmium, 117, 1- 289, h. Sardican,
took a body naturally subject to death, 84, c. 123, u. with a date, 83, y.
243, i. submitted to death, as man, 124, y. of Ancyra, 139, m.
at His will, 481, e. His soul had not Constans, 110, p.
God's infinite knowledge, 461, b. Constantine, treats the Arian question
His soul was troubled, &c. 477, a^ as a logomachy, 65, 1.
highly ho-
had a human will and a divine, 480, c. noured in memory, 59, b.
d. yet not two discordant wills, 480, c. Constantius, 74, 2. 90, p. 109, 1. 117, i.
Christ, had both a divine and human 127, e. 158, 2. 190, c.
knowledge, 461, b. had a soul in Consubstantial, vid. One in Substance.
nature ignorant, ibid, but not igno- applied to the doctrine of the Incar-
rant in fact, ibid, was not ignorant nation, 551, h.
though ex humana natura, ibid,
in, Convulsions, &c. proper to heretical
said by some fathers to be ignorant prophets, 467, i-
as man, ibid. 462, c. and to grow in Councils, (vid. Nicene,) Ecumenical,
knowledge, 462, c. tiiis doctrine 49,0. 79, 1- 93, 2. 103, 1. 188, 1.
afterwards heretical, 462, d. His their decisions cannot be re-discussed,
fix and
ignorance said by the fatliers to be 5, m. 84, c. function of, to
but economical, 464, f. 468, k. held authenticate traditions, 49, p. their
to be truly ignorant by Adoptionists, condemnation sufficient without con-
466, g. ignorant for our sakes, 468, k. troversy, 188, b.
assumes ignorance as the Almighty Council of Antioch against Samosatene,
in the O. T. 471, n. o. perfect in 141, 0. of Tyre, 103^ u. of Seleucia,
.
knowledge, as man, from the first, 73, c. of Jerusalem, 103, u. of the
473, p. as man, knew all things that dedication at Antioch, 105, z. of
are in fact, not in posse, ibid, said by Sirmium, 117, 1- of Ancyra, 139,
some Fathers to grow in wisdom, (2nd) m. of Ariminum, 88, k. of
474, q. His wisdom did not grow, Lateran under Pope Martin, 416, f. of
but was manifested, ibid. Fourth Lateran, 145, r. of Basil,
Christians do not take titles from men, 461, 6. of Trent, 389, h.
179, e. 180, f, 1. 181, 1. Creation, &c. eternal because gene-
Chrysoloyus, J 6, i. ration, according to Origen, 65, m.
Chri/sostom, 16, i. has no simihtude on earth, 18, o.
Church, of the Holy Sepulchre, 103, x. 153, c. in posse, 65, m. not eternal,
the Dominicum Aureum, 105, z. because creatures perishable, 223, g.
means archetypal Son, 373, s. 390, i. power exceeds His actual operations,
Flesh, Christ's, our renovation, 250, d. 378, f.
359, 1. 300, g. 374, t. 447, u. 449, a. God suffered, was buried, &c. God's
Force, adoption of in religion, 4, h. 53, f. body, &c. 290, 1. 444, i.
280, f. God's Mother, 420, i. 440, e. 447, 3
G. H.
Generation Divine, eternal, 19, s, 201, b. Heresies, in what they agreed and dif-
and never ceasing, 201, b. an end, fered, 41, e. 114, b. run into each
not a way to an end, 201, b. 527, k. other, 189, b. 292, n. 295, o. are
necessary for external Divine opera- partial views of the truth, 219, b.
tions, 25, e. 284, e. 518, 7- beyond 450, c.
INDEX TO FOOT NOTES AND MARGINAL REFERENCES. 585
Heresies, concerning Christ, agree one God, one Image, 318, 4. implies
(most of them) in denying our Lord's perfection, 201, c.
implies eternity,
titles to belong to one and the same 209, d. implies consubstantiality,
Person, 41, e. 312, m. tended to deny ibid, impl'es unalterableness, 231, 1.
the Atonement, 2^7, 1. 255, 1. implies unchangeable son-
Heresy, the principle of interminable ship, 21 1, f. 22f;, 1. 283, d. is implitd
schism, 80, r. in Sonship, 312, m. in being Word,
Heretical baptism, whether valid, 339, ibid, illustrated by image of Emperor,
e. whether it
cleanses, 340, f. how far, 405, o. vid. also (iJ, i. we
Heretics, zealous for Scripture 178, c. new made in the Son's, for made in,
vid. Scripture, called after their 251, 1.
masters, 179, e. 180, f. set up against Imitation not renewal, 359, 1. 3(i0, g.
their masters, 80, r. 92, 1. irreverent, 393, e. a means of renewal, 254, i.
213, a. affect reverence, 221, f. 428, r.
not the sincere and ignorant, In, sense of, 430, s.
330, o. Incarnation of the Creator for our new
Hermas, 7, q. 31, o. creation, 251, f. 355, 3. 388, 2.
Hermits of S. Austin, general of, his caused by man's sin, 350, d. for
error at Council of Basil, 4(>1, b. atonement and renewal, 357. e. these
Hieracas, 97, 1. 523. b. two ends made one by the Fathers,
Hilary, S. never heard the Nicene ibid. not necessary for for-
456, 5.
Creed till he was in exile, 7'>i i. giveness, 254, k. necessary for re-
excuses the Semi-Arians, 103, t. newal, 254, k. 360, g. 378, e. for
calls the Council of the Dedication renewal in original Image of God,
an assembly of Saints, lOo, z treats 251, 1. for stedfastnes-, 254, 1. 372,
the creed of Sirmium as Catholic, 1. 380, 1. 390. 2. 395, 2. 434, 3.
117,1. 475, 4. 552, 2.
Hosius, 122, t. Incense burnt before imperial statues,
Human nature has no stay, 18, p. 313, n.
211, f. 251, e. assumed by our Lord, Indiction, 109, n.
as it is, 241, h. sin not of the sub- Indifferentisvi, 178, d.
stance of, 241, h. Inyenerate, symbol of the Anomoeans,
Hypocrisy, Arian, 127, g. 187, 3. 193, 4. 50, a. four sentes of, 5?, e. 146, 1.
Hypostases divided, 46, 1. Arians used it against the Son, 53, g.
113, 2. not introduced into the bap-
tismal form, 5(5, i. used against the
Holy Spirit by INIacedonians, 121, s.
arguments brought against by fathers,
Ignorance, our Lord's (vid. Christ) 228, f.
consequence of sin, 47.3, p. man's of Irreverence a sure mark of heresy,
the last day, why, 470, m. 213, a.
Illustrations of heavenly things, 141, 3. Irvingites, 467, i-
2 u
586 INDEX TO FOOT NOTES AND MARGINAL REFERENCES.
of, 155, g. yet rightly must mean Monnphysites, 243, i. 292, n. 295, o.
oneness in nature, 76i i- 106, d. 359, f. 385, a.
136, g. 139, 1. 157, i. 211, f. wrong, Montanists, 78, 1. 467, i-
when used of the Son, only when it Mother of God or 0eoT<5/cos, title of. S.
isthe extreme point confessed, 100, d. Mary allowed by Arians, 447, x.
Like in Substance does not imply of ascribed by some to the Arians, 292,
the Substance, 139, 3. not material, n. held by !Monophysites, ibid, really
as " One in Substance," according to condemned the Monophysites, 447,
Eusebians, 1 44,
q. X. antiquity of, 420, i. meaning of,
Like in alt things, 84, a. 115, e. 440, e. used by Greek Fathers, 447, s.
Living Lnage, &c. the Son of the by Latin, 447, x. test against Nesto-
Father, 254, 463, e. 491, n.
i. rians, ibid.
Lucian, 13, b. 104, y. lOG, b. c. Mystery the distinct mark of the Ca-
Luther, 46, k. 295, o. tholic doctrine of the Trinity, 439, c.
mysteries in Scripture are of facts not
words, 238, e.
M.
Novelty, a refutation of alleged doc- same one Substance yet not mere
trines, 12, y. 76. !• 78, o. involves aspects of the same, 326, g. 515, r.
change, 76? k. 80, s. worshipped with one worship, 407, r.
Number, the Divine Nature not subject operate with one operation, 309, 3.
to, 334, y. 412, d. 452, a. 337, c. 338, 4. 416, f. 422. 1. one in
will, 324, c. if one in will and operation,
one in Substance, 416, f. Each God
O. wholly, 334, y. 406, p. 407, s. 412, d,
515, r. X. Each as absolutely God as if
One in Substance, (vid. Substance,) 35, the Others were not, 326, g. 515^ r.
t. implies Same in liiieness, 35, u. contain Each Other, 326, g. 338, d.
involves equality, 40, c. secures our 399, a. contain Each Other because
privilege as well as Christ's prero- the same Substance, 399, a. b. 402,
gative, 57, k. excludes a second g. vid. also 203, d. Each Ofher's life,
Substance, G3, g. accused of mate- 400, d. numerically one, 399, a. 402, g.
rialism, 63 h. 141, 4. of Sabellianism, yet really beyond number, 334, y.
203, d. sense put on it by the Eusebi- 412, d. 452, a. Each, when contem-
ans, 144, q. specific test of heresy, plated by our feeble reason, excludes
a word of long standing in the
14(J, s. the Others, 412, d. when viewed tc-
Church, 64, k history of, 35, t. de-
.
gether, abstracted not into Three,
nied by Arians before the Nicene but into One Substance, ibid. Each
Council, 95, b.- why rejected at An- 412, d. the Father works through
first,
tioch, 143, p. not insisted on un- the Son in the Spirit, 422, 1.
seasonably by Athanasius, 157, i. Person, the First in the Holy Trinity
178, d. nor by others, 157, i. loses nothing by giving all to the
One by Agreement, 107, f- 155, g. Son, 326, g 407, s. because He
414, b. gives eternally, 201, c. imparts di-
Orations, S. Athan.'s methodical, 306, vinity, that is, is one with, 203, d.
b. repetitions in, 225, b. 2G5, k. Person, the Second in the Holy Trinity
Origen, AA, e. AH, 1.252, h. not a quality, attribute, or relation,
326, g. 615, r. u. not a part of God,
326, g. revealed solely in His relation
to the First, 452, b..whole God, 326,
g. has the Godhead, propriety, &c.
Pantheism, 333, t. of the First, 145, r. 400, d. is the
Paraclete, denied by heretics to be the being, fulness, life, the all of the
Spirit in O.T. 548, d. First, 400, d. 403, i. 1. 407, s. 424, o.
Participation, whole, the same as gene- 475, 2. one with the First because from
ration, 15, f. of God through the Son, the First, 402, g. whole God because
15, e. 41, 2. 202, 8. 246, a. charac- Son of whole God, 407, s. 412, d.
teristic of Sonship, 15, f. a gift to all Personality, our Lord's in the manhood,
creation, 32, q. of the Word, dei- taught by Marcellus, Phoiinus. &c.
fication, 151, 2—5. 192, I. 236, c. 512. b. not in the Godhead, by Arius,
380, h. 434, 5. 6. of the Son, adoption, &c. 41, e. not in the manhood, 234, 4.
230, c. 237, 1- 244, 1. 446, o.
Patripassian doctrine, 114, b. 115, f. Philo, 107, e. 120, q. 292, m.
629, d. Philoponus, 16, i.
Patronage Court, possessed by Arians, Philosophers, Greek, discordant, 8, r.
4, n. J
90, c. how far pursued by Christian fathers,
Patrophilus, 74, g. 62, d. 22 J, a.
" the
Pant, S. called Apostle," 131, d. Phoiinus, llO.q. 114,b. 117, 1.
Paul of Samosata. (vid. Samosateue ) Platonic doctrine, 45, h. 51, b. 131, e.
term, 412, d. more correct to say the test of Arian East against, 105, z.
than a, ibid, whether possible
to tpeak 109, m.
of God One
Person, ibid.
as Potamius, 122, t.
Persons, of the Holv Trinity imply Potentially, God Creator ever, but not
Each Other, 33, r. eternally distinct Father, 65, m.
from Each Other, 211, f. 412, d. the Praxeas, 45, h.
2 Q 2
588 INDEX TO FOOT NOTES AND MARGINAL REFEKENCES.
corrective of that of Word, 140, n. allthat the Father has, except being
does not imply posteriority, 412, c. Father, 149 x. 404, 7 whether called
implies eternity, 98, n. fin. liigher Son only prophetically, 541, b. in
titlethan eternal, 439, d. whether the what sense exalted, 239, f. said to
Son not before the creation, 98, m. have received, when He received for
Sox OF God, the Hand of God, 12, z. us, 521, 2.
323, a. 382, 8. 546, 1. Minister of Sox OF God, the Archetype of our Son-
God, 15, d. 311, i. Bi Iding of the ship, 15, 32, q. 56, k. 140, n. is
f.
Father, 324, b. not His command, Son not as we are, 10, g. beginning
329, 7. Will of the Father, 324, c. of ways, because God, 350, 1. first-
4J3, f. 490, 1. or rather Will of Will. born, "367, d. 3C8, f. 309, k. 371,
491, m. living Will, 284, 3. 491, n. p. first-born to creation, as arche-
Sox OF GoD,(%id. in//,) begotten at the typal, 370, m. 373, s. 396, i. not a
Father's will, according to some early creature because first-born of crea-
fathers, 485, d. according to heretics, tures, 370, n. First-born, not as heir,
485, f. and some later fathers, 48U, g. but as representative of others, 372, r.
ment, 118, n. 3.37, c. 44.3, g. 311. i. hood, and how, 344, f. 347, •• dif-
in what sense bidden, 324, b. 443, f. ference of on the point
opinion
not of a visible substance, 120, q. among and divines, 344, f.
fathers
555, 2. the Father's Image not as not adopted Son even in manhood,
Father but as God, 149, x. Image of ibid, first-born from the dead, 307, d.
the Father's substance, not Person, created because man created in Him,
211, f. not brother to the Father or 372, r. said to be created, with a
the Sjiirit, 200, a. not His own Fa- purpose, 380, 0. first-born for man
ther, 614, o. eternal because God, adopted in Him, ibid, in all His
198, 1. eternal because Son, 98, n. saints, 241, g. 366, c. 372, r. in Him
112, X. eternal because the Father alone adoption, 377> c. 412, 3. by
l)crfect, 201, c. ever perfect though taking flesh destroys its passions,
a Son, 201, c. is God, else God once 440, 5. 447, u. 479, 1. 2. 520, 2,
wisdom-less, &e. 25, c. 208, b. 517, 5. 449, 2. is sanctified, for we sancti-
is God because lie communicates fied in Him, 250, 1. imparts holiness
to us not Himself, but the Father, by His soul, immortality by His
15, c. is God because no creature body, 449, a. a living law and pat-
can unite creatures to God, 23, 1. tern, 2-')4, i.
254, 1. 2.
319, 4.
Substance of God not distinct from God,
34, s. 1. expresses God posi-
38, a. 132,
tively, 34, has no accidents, 37, y.
s.
T.
A. a.iTO(TTo\7)v, 553, 4.
dpx^;. 250, d. 412, c. 513, f. 545, a.
aya-n-rirhs, 549, 2.
542, c. apxh oSwy, 348, k.
ayevr]Tov, 31, p. 33, r. 51, a. b. 52, e. dpx^ yevdaecos, 304, 3. 354, 3. 547, 3.
224, a. 225, b. 226, c. affi^na, 1, a. 364, b.
a.yivu7)T0v, 226, C. affvarrciTos, 490, 4.
ayevvr)T(vs, 332, 2- a.T€\))s, 201, 1.
dyioi, 325, 1. 338, 6. 375, 2. 553, G. &Tp€TTTOi/ Koi avaKKoiwrov, 39, 2. vid.
554, 7. TpeTTTOS.
&yovos, 202, 1. 207, 3. 518, 7- auT^^ovaios, 230.
aSialperoi', 39, 1. 406, 6. 419, 1. 429, 4, avToaA7)0?;s, 144, 1.
aOeKriTos, 494, 3. auTOTTpofTcoTrais, 114, d.
&9eos, adeoTTjs, 3, f. aOrbs, 359, f. 521, 3.
aXviyixo, 39), 2. avTocTocpia, &c. 144, 1. 391, 3. 393, 2.
alwv, 30, n. 394, 4. 514, p. 518, 2.
alccvLos, 198, 2. 3. ai/TOvpye?!^, 317; 2.
a/(oAoi;eia, 293, 2. 298, 1 . 338, 3.
a.Kpai<pviffTaTos, 317» 3.
axparov, 13, 1. 316, 2. 372, 6.
—
aXKos ovK aWov, ov^ er^pov, 446, 0.
vid. 234, 4. 235, I.
Siecpeapp-evrj, 484, 1.
Sii^dt} Tii-a, 517, 1. Cwoyoverrat, 400, 5.
5ua5a, 517, 3.
Swa/xts, 493, 2.
5i^o (vyobs, 486', 3.
H.
elp/xus, 460, 1.
0.
6/c, 434, 2.
eKKa/j.\l/iv, 475, 9.
eAaxTo-Ma, 244, 1 452, 1 460, 3. 475, 1.
. . BcavdptK^ ivepyeia, 445, m.
e/xeroL, 322, e. vid. 232, 3. 0i\^}(rfi,116, g.
f/x/iofov, 349, 1. 6£\r]ats Trpo-nyovfiivrj, 48G, h.
ffj.(pt\oxe>>pe7v, 46, 1. OeKijcris ffvi'Spofj.os, ibid.
ETnVo.a, &c. 96, e 193, 1. 307, d. 316, 1. 1. 280, 311, 1. 318, 3. 476. I.
1.
331, 4. 332, 1. 333, u. 522, 2. 527, 2. iSi'os, 78, n. 233, a. "256, o. 414, a. 477,
4trnr\riTr€tv, 458, C. 5. 485, 7.
K. O.
M. n.
TToAueiSoCs, 422, 7-
vfavteveadai, 472, 2. iro\vKe(pa\os, 492, p.
i/eP/xa, 443, f.
Ko/xirela, 348, 2. 3/9, k.
596 I>'DEX OF GREEK WORDS.
i/Vaclis, 407, 1.
vneppvris, 243, i.
423, 4.
inroypaufihs, 429, 3.
uTToo-Tao-is, 399, 3. 4!i4. t. 513, g. 543, 3.
pauTiCd/J-fos, 340, 1. 545, a. 552, 5. 553. 8.
490, 1. 495, I.
poTT),, vTroTeTay/j-evof, 122, 2.
iiTovpyh^, 12, 1. 311, i. 315, 2. 320, 5.
324, 1. 444, 1.
ffv/jL^e^riKhs, 37, y.
(Tvn(pwvia, 148, 5. 414, b. 432, 1.
avvipyhs, 320, 5.
cuz'Spo/xos- QiK-qais, 48f), h. X.
(jyx'fieTos,-514, q. 515, r, s.
(Tvue(p6p-ijaav, 193, b. 213, 1.
Xap'^o'fJ.ara, 520, 4. 621, 1.
awovawv, 203, d.
Xpio"TO,uaxos, 0, n.
(ruyoiy, 412, 1.
XpiffTO<p6poi, 404, 2.
(T(ji^aT.K7]v napovalau, 295, 1 .
"¥.
T.
416, 3. 473, 2. 518, 1. 533,
il/ei^So^/rri,
543, 5.
1.
4
RECENTLY PUBLISHED BY
'
1268(3)40
2 IfJEW TSEOLOQICAL WORKS, {continued).
KEV. E. E. TYRWHITT.
ESTHER AND AHASUERUS : an Identification of the Persons
so Named followed by a History of the Thirty-five Years that ended at their
;
Marriage, with Notes and an Index to the Two Parts: also an Appendix. By
Richard Edmund Tyrwhitt, M.A., Retired Indian Chaplain. Two Vols.,
8vo. (970 pp.), cloth, 24s.
ARCHDEACON CHUETON.
SUPPLEMENT TO WATERLAND'S WORKS. FOURTEEN
LETTERS FROM DANIEL WATERLAND TO ZACHARY PEARCE.
Edited, with an Historical and Critical Preface, by Edward Ciiurto.v, M.A.,
Archdeacon of Cleveland. 8vo., sewed, 2s. 6d.
A MEMOIR OF THE LATE JOSHUA WATSON, Esq. By the
Venerable Archdeacon Churton. A vew and cheaper Edition, with Portrait.
Crown 8vo., cloth, 7s. 6d.
EAEL NELSON.
FAMILY PRAYEES. By Earl Nelsoi^. With the Psalter and
a Calendar of Lessons, for the use of the Master. Third Edit.
Limp cloth, Is.
The Family Prayers, with Responses and Variations for the Different Seasons,
for General Use, may he had separately, in paper covers, at 3d. each; or with the
Psalter, limp clotli, 9d.
Also, the Calendar of Lessons a Course of Readinp: for the Christian Year,
;
REV. H. W. BELLAIRS.
THE CHURCH AND THE SCHOOL ; or, Hints on Clerical Life.
By Henry Walfoud Bellairs, ^LA., one of Her Majesty's Inspectors of
Schools. Crown 8vo., cloth, .5s.
\_Ready.
THE LORD BISHOP OF OXFORD.
ADDRESSES TO THE CANDIDATES FOR ORDINATION ON
THE QUESTIONS IN THE ORDINATION SERVICE. By Samuel,
Lord Bishop of Oxford, Chancellor of tiie Most Noble Order of the Garter,
and Lord High Almonei to Her Majesty the Queen. Fifth Thousand. Crown
8vo., cloth, Gs.
REV. J. R. WOODFORD.
TRACTS FOR THE CHRISTIAN SEASONS. Third Series.
Edited by the Rev. J. R. Woodford, M.A., Vicar of Leeds, Exaniiiiing
Chaplain to the Bishop of Oxford. 4 vols. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, Hs.
DIOCESAN CONFERENCE ADDRESSES.
THE SERMONS AND ADDRESSES delivered at a Conference of
Clergy of the Diccese of Oxford, held in Oxford, on the 4lli, 5th, and 6th of July,
1867. With a Preface by the Lord Bishop of Oxford. Crown 8vo., 2f. 6d.
REV T S ACKLAND
A SHORT SUMMARY OF THE EVIDENCES FOR THE BIBLE.
By the Rev. T. S. Acklanu, M.A., late Fellow of Clare Hall, Cambridge, In-
cumbent of rollington-cum-Balne, Yorkshire. 24mo., cloth, 3s,
REV. C. A. HETJRTLEY, D.D.
THE FORM OF SOUND WORDS HELPS TOWARDS HOLDING :
ARCHDEACON FEEEMAN.
THE PRINCIPLES OF DIVINE SERVICE ; or, Au Inquiry con-
cerning the True Manner of Understanding and Using the Order for IMorning and
Evening Prayer, and for the Administration of the Holy Communion in the Eng-
lish Church. By the Ven. Archdeacon Freeman, M.A., Vicar of Thorverton,
Prebendary of Exeter, and Examining Chaplain to the Lord Bishop of Exeter.
2 vols., 8vo., cloth, 1/. 4s. 6d.
The Volumes may he had separateli/, thus— Vol. I., 10s. Gd,; Vol. IL,
Part L, 65. ; Vol. IL, Fart IL, Ss.
EEV. J. W. BUEGON.
A PLAIN COMMENTARY ON THE FOUR HOLY GOSPELS,
intended for chiefly Devotional Reading. 5 vols., Fcap. 8vo., cloth, £1 Is.
the Course of
following the Christian Seasons. Second Series. By the Rev.
John W. Burgon, M.A., Fellow of Oriel, and Vicar of St.
Mary-the-Virgin's.
Now complete in Two Volumes. Fcap., clotli, Ss.
The First Series (Ninety) may also be had in Two Volumes, cloth, 8s.
THOMAS A KEMPIS.
OF THE IMITATION OF CHRIST. Four. Books. Ry Thomas
A Kempis. A New Edition revised. On thick toned
paper, with Ved border-
lines, medieval titles, ornamental initials, &c. Small 4to., ornamental cloth, 12s.
OF THE IMITATION OF CHRIST. Four Books. By Thomas
A Kempis. A new Edition, revised. Printed in red and black with red lines,
on toned paper. Fcap., cloth
antique, 4s; antique calf, red edges, lis.
tory in the Scottish Church. Second Edition. Post Svo., price 10s. 6d.
ANCIENT COLLECTS and OTHER PRAYERS, Selected for De-
votional Use from various Rituals, with an Appendix on the Collects in the
Prayer-book. By William Bright, ]\I.A. Third Edition. Antique cloth, 5s.;
morocco, 8s. ;
antique calf, 12s.
EEV. W H EAESLAKE
AN EXPOSITION t)F THE LORD'S PRAYER, Devotional, Doc-
trinal, and Practical witli Four
;
Preliminary Dissertations, and an Appendix of
Extracts from Writers on the
Prayer for Daily Use. By the Rev. W. H. Kars-
f,AKE, Fellow and sometime Ti^or qf Mertoa College, Oxford. 8vo., cloth, 7s. 6d.
THEOLOGICAL WORKS, {conihiued).
REV. W. H. EIDLEY.
THE EVERY-Dx\.Y COIIPAIS^ON. By the Eev. W. H. Ridley,
M.A., Rector of Hanibleden, Bucks. Ft. I. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 2s. Ft. II. Is. Gd.
E.EV DP HE'^S^'Y
CATECHETICAL LESSOJN^S, clcsignecTto aid the Clergy in Public
Catechising. Two Vols., Fcap., cloth, 10s.
—
Contents of Vol. I. On the Apostles' Creed, The Lord's Prayer, The Ten
Commandments, The Two Sacraments, The Thirty-nine Articles, and on the
Order for Morning and Evening Prayer and tlie
Contents of Vol. II. — On Litan}'.
Parables and Miracles of our Lord, on the
the
Saints' Days, and on IMiscellaneous Subjects for the use of Bible Classes.
Also, in continuation,
CATECHETICAL LESSOIs'S 0^ THE BOOK OF COMMON
PRAYER. By the Rev. Dr. Francis Hessey. Vol. I., to the end of the
Collects, Epistles, and Gospels. Cloth, 6s. \_Just ready.
REV. E. CHEERE.
THE CIIUKCH CATECHISM EXPLAIXED. By the Eev.
Edward Cheere, I\I.A., Vicar of Little Drayton. Fcap., cloth, 2s. 6d.
REV T LATHBTJEY
A HISTOUT OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYEB, AND
OTHER AUTHORIZED BOOKS, from the Reformation; and an Attempt to
ascertain how the Rubrics, Canons, and Customs of the Church have been under-
stood and observed from the same time: with an Account of the State of Reli-
gion in England from 1640 to 1660. I3j- tlie Rev. Thomas Lathbury, M.A.,
Author of "A History of tlie Convocation," &-c. Second Edition. 8vo., 10s. 6d.
REV. H. DOWNING.
SHORT NOTES ON ST. JOHN'S GOSPEL, intended for the Use
of Teachers in Parish Schools, and other Readers of the English Version. By
Hf.nry Downing, iM. a.. Incumbent of St. Mary's, Kingswinford. Fcap. 8vo.,
cloth, 2s. Gd.
ON THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. Cloth, 2s.
DR. ELVEY.
THE PSALTER, or Canticles and Psalms of David, Pointed for
Chanting, upon a New Principle ;
with Explanations and Directions. By the
late Stkphen Elvfy, ]\Ius. Doc, Organist and Choragus to the University of
Oxford. Fifth Edition, 8vo., cloth, price 5s.
8EEM0NS, ^c.
SERMONS, &c.
PAROCHIAL SERMOXS. By E. B. Ppsey, D.D. From Advent
to Whitsuntide. Vol. I. Fifth Edition. 8vo., ciolli, C". Vol. II. Fourth
Edition. 8vo., cloth, 6s.
Domestic Chaplain to the Right Hon. the Earl of Devon. 2nd Fd.
Fcap. 8vo., 2s.
THE CURE OF SOULS. By the Same. Fcap. 8yo., 2s. 6d.
Practised, and Desired, or Prayed for. By or, a complete Manual of Private Devotions,
Bishop Jeulmy Taylor. Printed uniform collected from the Writings of eminent Di-
with " Holy Living and Holy Dying." An-
tique cl., 3s. 6d.
vines of the Church of England. Floriated
borders, antique cl., 4s.
f
The 3 Volumes in antique cf. hindlng, £1 Cs. Gd.
Ancient Collects.
ANCIENT COLLECTS and OTHER
Sutton's Meditations. PRAYERS. By Wm. Bright, M.A. Seep.Z.
GODLY MEDITATIONS UPON EIKnN BA2IAIKH.
THE JIO.ST HOLY SACRAMENT OF THE THE PORTRAITURE OF HIS
LORD'S SUPPER. By Christopher Sut- SACRED MAJESTY KING CHARLES I.
ton, D.D., late Prebend of Westminster. in his Solitudes and Sufferings.
A new Edition, Antique cloth, 5s.
[/w the Press,
FOETET, ^c. ^J8
CORNISH BALLAD 3.
THE CORNISH BALLADS AND OTHER rOE:MS oi the Ilev.
R. S. Hawker. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 5s.
"THE CATHEDRAL."
THE CATHEDRAL. Foolscap 8vo., cloth, 7s. Gd. ; 32mo., with
Engravings, 4s. 6d.
THE SE^^N DATS ; or, The Old and New Creation. Second
Edition, Foolscap 8vo., 7s. (jd.
THE LITANY
HTMNS ON THE LITANY. By A." C. Fcap. 8vo,, oii toned
paper, cloth extra, 3s.
THE APOSTLES' CREED.
LYRA FIDELIUil: Twelve Hymns on the Twelve Articles of the
Apostles' Creed, with Prose .Analysis and full S.-riptural Autliorities, By
S. J. Stone, B..\., Curate of Windsor. Fcap. 8vo., on toned paper, cloth, 2s. Gd.
THE SECOND LESSONS.
MORNING THOUGHTS. By a Clkrgyman. Suggested by the
Second Lessons for tlie Daily Morning Service throughout the year. 2 vols.
Foolscap 8vo., cloth, 5s. each.
PHOFESSOR DAUBENY.
MISCELLANIES: BEING A COLLECTION OF MEMOIRS and
ESSAYS ON SCIENTIFIC AND LITERARY SUBJECTS, published at
Various Times, by the l;ite C.iarles
Daubeny, M.D., F.R.S., Professor of
Botany and of Rural Economy in the University of Oxford, &c. 2 vols., 8vo„
cloth, 2 1 .-•.
PROFESSOR BURROWS.
THE RELATIONS OF CHURCH AND STATE HISTORICALLY
CONSIDERED. Two Public Lectures delivered at Oxford, on November 16
and 17, 1865. By Montagu Burkows, Chichele Professor of Modern History.
Post Svo., limp cloth, 3s.
CHARLES ELTON.
THE TENURES OF KENT; or, A
View of the Kentish Lands
which are not Gavelkind.
Chiefly from Unpublished Records and MSS., with
many New Cases, By Charles Elton, late Fellow of Queen's College,
Oxford; and of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister- at- Law. Royal 8vo., cloth, 1/. 6s.
G G SCOTT F S A
GLEANINGS FROM WESTMINSTER* ABBEY. By George
GiLBiiRT ScoTT, R.A., F.S.A. With Appendices supplying Further Particu-
lars, and completing the History of the Abbey Buildings, by Several Writers.
Second Edition, enlarged, containing many new Illustrations by O. Jewitt and
others. Medium Svo., 15s.
M. VIOLLET-LE-DUC.
THE MILITARY ARCHITECTURE OF THE MIDDLE AGES,
Translated from the French of M. Viollet-le-Duc. By M. MacDermott,
Esq., Architect. With the 151 original French Engravings. Medium Svo.,
cloth, £1 Is.
JOHN HEWITT.
ANCIENT ARMOUR AND WEAPONS IN EUROPE. By John
Hewitt, Member of the Archaeological Institute of Great Britain. Vols. II. and
III., comprising the Period from the Fourteenth to tiie Seventeenth Century,
completing the work, 1^ 12s. Also Vol. I., from the Iron Period of the Northern
Nations to the end of the Thirteenth Century, 18s. The work complete, 3 vols.,
Svo., 21. 10s.
REV. PROFESSOR STUBBS.
THE TRACT "DE INVENTIONE SANCTiE CRUCIS NOSTRA
IN MONTE ACUTO ET DE DUCTIONE EJUSDEM APUD WALT-
HAM," now first printed from tlie Manuscript in the British Museum, witli In-
troduction and Notes by William Stubhs, iSI.A., Vicar of Navestock, late Fellow
of Trinity College, Oxford. Royal Svo uniform witli the Works issued by the
,
Master of the Rolls, (only 100 cojiies printed,) price 5s. Demy Svo., 3s. (id.
;
J T BLIGHT r S A
THE CROMLECHS OF CORNWALL some Account of other
': \vith
Prehistoric Sepulchral Monuments, and Articles found in connection with them,
in the same County. By J. T. Blight, F.S.A. Medium 8vo., with numerous
Illustrations. [/« the Press.
NEW AND STANLAMD HDUCATIONAL WORKS, IS
GEEEK POETS.
Cloth. Cloth.
s. d.
LATIN POETS.
Horatius 2 Lucretius 2
Juvenalis et Persius 1 6 Pha'drus 1 4
Lucanus 2 6 Virgilius 2 G
EURIPIDES. Clotli.
s. d. s. d.
HzcvBA {Text and Notes) ViKESissjE {Tejct and Notes)
Medea
Orestes
„ ..10
..10
. I
Alcestis „
The above Xotes only, in one vol.,
.
.10
cloth, 3s.
1
HlPPOLKTUS
,,
DEMOSTHENES.
De Corona {Text and Notes) . 2 |
Olynthiac Orations . .10
Philippic Orations, in the Press.
SALLUSTIUS.
J VOVK1HA {Text and Notes) . 1 6 \
Catilina {Texts and Notes) . 1
M. T. CICERO.
Pro MihonE {Text and Notes) . 1 In Q. Cecilium — Divinatio
In Catilinam ,, .10 ( Text
and Notes) 1
Price 4s.
lists,wliich date from the earliest times in the hislory of the University to the
present. The first of tliese decennial volumes is made up to the end of the year
1860; the second will be issued after the end of 1870. The Calendar itself
will be published annually as before, and will contain <';11 the Class Lists, and all
the names of Officers, Professors, and others, accruing since the date of the
For the Academical Year en.ling 1865, in one vol., 8vo., cloth, price 12s.
For the Academical Year ending 1866, in one vol., 8vo., cloth, price 12s.
For the Academical Year ending 1867, in one vol., 8vo., cloth, price 12s.
I
BT Athanasius
1350 Select treatises of S. Athana-
A83 sius
1877
f <
^^1
1
fe
i^Sffi
ii
'
s^i'ia
'm
m
m
'
>:&
m K^'
iiOK