Section: 3C1 - Arius and the Trinity Controversy.
Number of quotes: 352
A Public Faith: From Constantine To The Medieval World AD 312-600 Vol. 2
Ivor J. Davidson
Book ID: 10 Page: 29
Section: 3C1
Often Arius is alleged to have held opinions and said things that he probably did not. There is no doubt that his beliefs need to be distinguished from those espoused by many of the people who later came to be called “Arians”; some of the diverse forms of Arianism that unfolded in the course of the fourth century were far removed from the teachings of Arius himself.
Quote ID: 135
Time Periods: 4
A Public Faith: From Constantine To The Medieval World AD 312-600 Vol. 2
Ivor J. Davidson
Book ID: 10 Page: 29/30
Section: 3C1
Christ was indeed known as the “Son of God,” but this, Arius argued, was a title given to him by divine grace and favor. The Son was to be thought of as a unique being produced by God to be the instrument by which the rest of creation was affected. As the only begotten one (John 1:18) his origins lay before time, but he was not coeternal with the Father. He was “the firstborn over all creation” (Col. 1:15), and the Wisdom brought forth as the first of the Lord’s works (Prov. 8:22-36), and thus exalted over all other creatures. He might even be said to be “divine,” but he remained a creature. He was not God.….
Not only in the East but also in the West, the disputes over Arianism were of enormous importance both for the churches and for the Roman Empire itself.
Quote ID: 136
Time Periods: 4
A Public Faith: From Constantine To The Medieval World AD 312-600 Vol. 2
Ivor J. Davidson
Book ID: 10 Page: 31
Section: 3C1
Formally excommunicated, Arius and a group of supporters, including six presbyters, six deacons, and two bishops from Libya, were obligated to leave their churches. However, like his bishop, Arius continued to be in correspondence with a wide range of other churchmen, and his backers grew increasingly numerous, not only in Nicomedia but also in Palestine and Syria. His most powerful ecclesiastical advocate proved to be the bishop of Caesarea, Eusebius, who got himself into serious trouble for his efforts to champion Arius’s position.
Quote ID: 137
Time Periods: 4
A Public Faith: From Constantine To The Medieval World AD 312-600 Vol. 2
Ivor J. Davidson
Book ID: 10 Page: 36
Section: 3C1
In addition to the creed, Nicaea bequeathed some other important legacies to the churches. Twenty “canons” or rules were issued, dealing with a number of practical and organizational matters.
Quote ID: 142
Time Periods: 4
A Public Faith: From Constantine To The Medieval World AD 312-600 Vol. 2
Ivor J. Davidson
Book ID: 10 Page: 36/37
Section: 3A1,3C1
Most crucially, the canons of Nicaea enshrined the principle that certain churches had a right to exercise authority over certain others. Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome were recognized as having rights respectively over the entire provincial territories of Egypt and Libya, Syria, and southern Italy. Their bishops were deemed to have specific duties as “metropolitans”, or leaders of an entire province rather than just a local diocese. They were to hold jurisdiction over other bishops within their provinces and have the right of veto over episcopal candidates in these regions.
Quote ID: 143
Time Periods: 4
A Public Faith: From Constantine To The Medieval World AD 312-600 Vol. 2
Ivor J. Davidson
Book ID: 10 Page: 40
Section: 3C1
The opposition was orchestrated from the start by former Melitian clerics in particular, who refused to accept Athanasius and elected their own candidate as bishop in his stead.
Quote ID: 147
Time Periods: 4
A.D. 381 Heretics, Pagans, and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 11 Page: 25
Section: 3C1,3D1
When Theodosius cleverly equated his Nicene beliefs with the promise of divine approval, he was not alone. At very much the same time, in the western empire, the Bishop of Milan, the formidable Ambrose, claimed that those areas of the empire where the Nicene faith was strong were stable while those where Arianism prevailed, notably along the Danube, were the most unsettled.
Quote ID: 175
Time Periods: 4
A.D. 381 Heretics, Pagans, and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 11 Page: 53
Section: 3C1
Arius found further support from another Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, the future biographer of Constantine.
Quote ID: 187
Time Periods: 4
A.D. 381 Heretics, Pagans, and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 11 Page: 55
Section: 3C1
Homoousios was a term taken from Greek philosophy, not from scripture. It had been used by pagan writers such as Plotinus to describe the relationship between the soul and the divine. Even the most ingenious biblical scholars combing their way through the Old and New Testaments could find no Christian equivalent. Quite apart from this the word had actually been condemned by a council of bishops meeting in Antioch in 268 on the grounds that it failed to provide sufficient distinction between Father and Son,
Quote ID: 188
Time Periods: 34
A.D. 381 Heretics, Pagans, and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 11 Page: 56
Section: 3C1
The Nicene statement was to form the core of the Nicene Creed, which forms the basis of faith in the Catholic, Orthodox and many Protestant Churches today.….
it said nothing about the Trinity, for instance – the only reference to the Holy Spirit was ‘And I believe in the Holy Spirit’.
Quote ID: 189
Time Periods: 4
A.D. 381 Heretics, Pagans, and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 11 Page: 57
Section: 3C1
When he was eventually baptized, in the closing months of his life in 337, the emperor called on Arius’ old supporter, the ‘blasphemous’ Eusebius of Nicomedia, whom he had reinstated in his bishopric in 327, to administer the sacrament.
Quote ID: 190
Time Periods: 4
A.D. 381 Heretics, Pagans, and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 11 Page: 58
Section: 3C1
The evidence seems to suggest that after Nicaea, Constantine was shrewd enough to accept that the debate was impossible to resolve. His policy was to be tolerant of differing beliefs while remaining intolerant of any bishops, such as Athanasius of Alexandria, who caused or intensified unrest in their communities. For Constantine, as with most emperors, good order was more important than correct doctrine.
Quote ID: 193
Time Periods: 4
A.D. 381 Heretics, Pagans, and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 11 Page: 63
Section: 3C1,3D
But there had been no mention of the Trinity in the Nicene Creed. The assertion ‘And I believe in the Holy Spirit’ had been included, but nothing was said of the Spirit having any divine status or being related to Father and Son in any way.
Quote ID: 194
Time Periods: 4
A.D. 381 Heretics, Pagans, and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 11 Page: 69
Section: 3C1
Athanasius had emerged from the shadow of Alexander, the champion of anti-Arianism, and he clung resolutely to the formula at Nicaea, including homoousios. However, his life at Alexandria was continually troubled by the tensions of the city and his readiness to exert his authority with violence.
Quote ID: 195
Time Periods: 4
A.D. 381 Heretics, Pagans, and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 11 Page: 103/104
Section: 3C1,3D,3D1
By creating a religious barrier between Homoian Goth and Nicene Roman, Theodosius could define a fault line along which he could rally his own troops against ‘the barbarians’. In the west, in these same years, Ambrose of Milan was stressing the relationship between support for the Nicene faith and the success of the empire in war.….
In effect, the emperor’s laws had silenced the debate when it was still unresolved.
….
It is likely that he was simply frustrated by the pressures he found himself under and genuinely believed that an authoritarian solution would bring unity to the embattled empire. At the same time control of dogma went hand in hand with greater control of the administrative structure of the Church.
….
by defining and outlawing specific heresies, he had crossed a watershed. It soon became clear that once the principle of toleration was successfully challenged, as it had been by his new laws, the temptation to extend the campaign against dissidents would be irresistible.
The first non-Christian sect to be attached was the Manicheans,
….
Theodosius ordered that no Manichean of either sex should be able to bequeath or inherit any property. This excluded Manicheans passing on family wealth from generation to generation, a basic right for Roman citizens. Then in 382, the emperor decreed the death penalty for membership of certain Manichean sects and put in place an informer system. It was to be the first step to the sect’s elimination and to a wider campaign against non-Christian beliefs.
Quote ID: 205
Time Periods: 34
Age of Constantine the Great, The
Jacob Burckhardt
Book ID: 614 Page: 260/261
Section: 3C1
But he has fallen into the hands of the most objectionable of all eulogists, who has utterly falsified his likeness. The man is Eusebius of Caesarea and the book his Life of Constantine. The man who with all his faults was always significant and always powerful is here presented in the guise of a sanctimonious devotee; in point of fact his numerous misdeeds are amply documented in a number of passages. Eusebius’ equivocal praise is basically insincere. He speaks of the man but really means a cause, and that cause is the hierarchy, so strongly and richly established by Constantine. Furthermore, to say nothing of the contemptible style, there is a consciously furtive mode of expression, so that the reader finds himself treading concealed traps and bogs at the most vital passages.
Quote ID: 9346
Time Periods: 4
Age of Constantine the Great, The
Jacob Burckhardt
Book ID: 614 Page: 261
Section: 3C1
The introduction of this biography is ecstatic enough: “When I gaze in spirit upon the three-blessed soul, united with God, free of all mortal dross, in robes gleaming like lightning and in ever radiant diadem, speech and reason stand mute, and I would willingly leave it to a better man to devise a worthy hymn of praise.
Quote ID: 9347
Time Periods: 4
Age of Constantine the Great, The
Jacob Burckhardt
Book ID: 614 Page: 261
Section: 3C1,3C
Then we could perhaps see clearly what we can now only surmise, namely, that virtually throughout his life Constantine never assumed the guise of or gave himself out as a Christian but kept his free personal convictions quite unconcealed to his very last days.….
It is highly probable that his treatment of Constantine is of a similar character, Then at least the odious hypocrisy which disfigures his character would disappear, and we should have instead a calculating politician who shrewdly employed all available physical resources and spiritual powers to the one end of maintaining himself and his rule without surrendering himself wholly to any party.
Quote ID: 9348
Time Periods: 4
Age of Constantine the Great, The
Jacob Burckhardt
Book ID: 614 Page: 282
Section: 3C1
But in his magisterial way he passes over Constantine’s perjury and all the other circumstances with the bald remark that the enemy of God and his evil counselors were condemned and punished according to military law.
Quote ID: 9350
Time Periods: 4
Age of Constantine the Great, The
Jacob Burckhardt
Book ID: 614 Page: 283
Section: 3C1
Eusebius is no fanatic; he understands Constantine’s secular spirit and his cold and terrible lust for power well enough and doubtless knows the true causes of the war quite precisely. But he is the first thoroughly dishonest historian of antiquity.….
Hence we have lost the picture of a genius in stature who knew no moral scruple in politics and regarded the religious question exclusively from the point of view of political expediency.
….
But Constantine was a more honorable man than Eusebius.
Quote ID: 9351
Time Periods: 4
Age of Constantine the Great, The
Jacob Burckhardt
Book ID: 614 Page: 293
Section: 3C1
And Eusebius, though all historians have followed him, has been proven guilty of so many distortions, dissimulations, and inventions that he has forfeited all claim to figure as a decisive source. It is a melancholy but very understandable fact that none of the other spokesmen of the Church, as far as we know, revealed Constantine’s true position, that they uttered no word of displeasure against the murderous egoist who possessed the great merit of having conceived of Christianity as a world power and of having acted accordingly. We can easily imagine the joy of the Christians in having finally obtained a firm guarantee against persecution, but we are not obliged to share the elation after a millennium and a half.
Quote ID: 9353
Time Periods: 4
Age of Constantine the Great, The
Jacob Burckhardt
Book ID: 614 Page: 293
Section: 3C1
Tolerant monotheism Constantine appears to have derived as a memory from the house of Chlorus, who was devoted to it. The first definite notice of a religious act on the part of Constantine is his visit to the temple of Apollo at Autun (308) before his renewed attack upon the Franks. He appears to have consulted the oracle and to have made rich offerings. But this worship of Apollo does not necessarily contravene the monotheism of his parental home, for Chlorus conceived of the highest being as a sun-god.
Quote ID: 9354
Time Periods: 4
Age of Constantine the Great, The
Jacob Burckhardt
Book ID: 614 Page: 301
Section: 3C,3C1
We must not forget that among other things Constantine “put a great many of his friends to death,” as the unsuspicious Eutropius says, and the more than suspicious Eusebius finds it well to pass over in silence.
Quote ID: 9355
Time Periods: 4
Age of Constantine the Great, The
Jacob Burckhardt
Book ID: 614 Page: 313
Section: 3C1
When Bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia took the part of the vain and peculiar but not impractical Arius, the struggle took on the aspect of a conflict between the sees of Alexandria and Nicomedia. In or near Nicomedia another synod was held, which declared in favor of Arius. At this time Eusebius of Caesarea was also inclined to this position; later, in his Life of Constantine, he presents an account of the conflict which is unique in its kind for dishonesty and intentional meagerness.
Quote ID: 9358
Time Periods: 4
An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine
John Henry Newman
Book ID: 324 Page: 183
Section: 3C1
Thus, not to mention the Arianism of the Eastern Empire in the fourth century, the whole of the West was possessed by the same heresy in the fifth….
Quote ID: 7767
Time Periods: 45
Ancient Rome by Robert Payne
Robert Payne
Book ID: 16 Page: 253
Section: 3C1
The argument - over the nature of Christ - aroused the passions not only of theologians but of the workers and artisans of Alexandria as well, men who followed the philosophical controversy with as much enthusiasm as some men devote to athletic contests. To resolve the differences between the two parties - the Arians, who claimed that Christ must have originated after God and was not equal to Him, and their opponents, who believed that Christ was coeternal with God - the First Ecumenical Council was called at Nicaea in 325 to settle all disputes. There the doctrine of the Trinity was formulated.
Quote ID: 321
Time Periods: 4
Apostasy that Wasn’t, The: The Extraordinary Story of the Unbreakable Early Church
Rod Bennett
Book ID: 561 Page: 98
Section: 3C1
Were there, in the early Church, old, unwritten customs regarding the handling of such delicate questions…as recorded in the lives of Antony and others during his era—shows that there were.What was that tradition? It might well be described simply as stubbornness: a tradition of stolid, donkey-like stubbornness born out of humility and the fear of God. There was a list, that’s all—an unwritten list of four rock-solid facts of our Faith, handed down by the saints gone before us. And the list—well, the list was the list:
1. That the Father is God;
2. That Jesus, his Son, is also God;
3. That Father and Son are not, however, mere names but real personalities who can relate not only to us but to one another;
4. Yet there is only one God.
Quote ID: 9238
Time Periods: 34
Apostasy that Wasn’t, The: The Extraordinary Story of the Unbreakable Early Church
Rod Bennett
Book ID: 561 Page: 108
Section: 3C1
Why? Because Constantine, to his credit, had chosen from the start to support the Christian Church as he found it; the existing society, that is, whose leaders …he had found already in charge. What this meant was that if the whole body of those leaders was ever called upon to adjudicate this Alexandrian matter for the entire Universal Church, then whichever of the two beliefs came out on top would be able to present itself simply as “Christianity,” and thus to count upon the emperor’s continued support.
Quote ID: 9239
Time Periods: 4
Apostasy that Wasn’t, The: The Extraordinary Story of the Unbreakable Early Church
Rod Bennett
Book ID: 561 Page: 130
Section: 3C1
Arius is only too willing to call the Son “perfect God” and to say he existed before time, so long as he is allowed to deny him the single most essential divine attribute: that of being actually eternal and uncreated. “We are persecuted, because we say that the Son has a beginning, but that God is without beginning. This is the cause of our persecution, and likewise, because we say that he is of the non-existent [created, in other words, out of nothing]. And this we say, because he is neither part of God, nor of any essential being. For this we are persecuted; the rest you know.”{73}
Quote ID: 9240
Time Periods: 4
Apostasy that Wasn’t, The: The Extraordinary Story of the Unbreakable Early Church
Rod Bennett
Book ID: 561 Page: 142
Section: 3C1
Nicaea really was, after all, a sort of “coming of age” for the Church—and like many adolescents, she hesitated to leave childhood behind.
Quote ID: 9241
Time Periods: 4
Apostasy that Wasn’t, The: The Extraordinary Story of the Unbreakable Early Church
Rod Bennett
Book ID: 561 Page: 144
Section: 3C1
What the emperor was actually looking for was the mind of the existing Church, or, to put it more cynically, he was looking to determine which was the majority opinion.
Quote ID: 9242
Time Periods: 4
Arab Historians of the Crusades
Fancesco Gabrieli
Book ID: 27 Page: 131
Section: 3C1
Night separated the two sides and the cavalry barred both the roads. Islam passed the night face to face with unbelief, monotheism at war with Trinitarianism, the way of righteousness looking down upon error, faith opposing polytheism.Pastor John notes: John’s note: Saladin’s secretary
Quote ID: 502
Time Periods: ?
Arius – Thalia in Greek and English (Online source: Fourth Century Christianity Home)
AJW
Book ID: 28 Page: 1
Section: 3C1
6. He who is without beginning made the Son a beginning of created things.
Quote ID: 504
Time Periods: 4
Arius – Thalia in Greek and English (Online source: Fourth Century Christianity Home)
AJW
Book ID: 28 Page: 1
Section: 3C1
He is invisible both to things which were made through the Son, and also to the Son himself.Pastor John notes: John’s note: but....
Quote ID: 505
Time Periods: 4
Arius – Thalia in Greek and English (Online source: Fourth Century Christianity Home)
AJW
Book ID: 28 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
13. I will say specifically how the invisible is seen by the Son: by that power by which God is able to see, each according to his own measure, the Son can bear to see the Father, as is determined
Quote ID: 506
Time Periods: 4
Arius – Thalia in Greek and English (Online source: Fourth Century Christianity Home)
AJW
Book ID: 28 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
20. Hence the Son, not being eternal came into existence by the Father’s will,
Quote ID: 507
Time Periods: 4
Arius – Thalia in Greek and English (Online source: Fourth Century Christianity Home)
AJW
Book ID: 28 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
24. The one who is superior is able to beget one equal to the Son, but not someone more important, or superior, or greater.
Quote ID: 508
Time Periods: 4
Arius – Thalia in Greek and English (Online source: Fourth Century Christianity Home)
AJW
Book ID: 28 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
So that the Son does not comprehend any of these things or have the understanding to explain them.For it is impossible for him to fathom the Father, who is by himself.
Quote ID: 509
Time Periods: 4
Arius Heresy & Tradition
Rowan Williams
Book ID: 29 Page: 85
Section: 3C1
Arius had learned from the theodidaktoi, as others have learned from Pamphilus or Lucian, and he makes an implicit claim to be himself a teacher in this kind of succession. Part of his tragedy is that (even among his allies) the tradition of such school-centred Christianity is a dying one. De facto, the controversy becomes a matter of episcopal politics. Arius was an anachronism, asking that the Constantinian Church resolve its problems as if it were the federation of study- circles…
Quote ID: 510
Time Periods: 4
Arius Heresy & Tradition
Rowan Williams
Book ID: 29 Page: 86
Section: 3C1
The difference between the cases of Origen and Arius is that, whereas in the early- to mid-third century {22} it was possible to live with unresolved disciplinary or canonical disagreements, {23} by the second decade of the fourth century the visible harmony and uniformity of the church had become, as observed above, a question of public and legal interest.
Quote ID: 511
Time Periods: 34
Arius Heresy & Tradition
Rowan Williams
Book ID: 29 Page: 86
Section: 3C1
Thus the history of Arius illuminates from one specific perspective the great shift in Christian self-understanding which we associate with the age of Constantine. We are witnessing a new development in Christian reflection on the boundaries and the definition of the Church.
Quote ID: 512
Time Periods: 4
Arius Heresy & Tradition
Rowan Williams
Book ID: 29 Page: 87
Section: 3C1
But in the larger cities of the empire, bishops were increasingly detached from the context of teaching, increasingly engaged in administering charities, building and maintaining churches, negotiating disciplinary issues with their colleagues {28}…
Quote ID: 513
Time Periods: 4
Arius Heresy & Tradition
Rowan Williams
Book ID: 29 Page: 88
Section: 3C1
How is this to be harmonized with the appeal to secular authority to resolve disputes over the things of God? The fact of central importance in understanding this is that Eusebius Pamphilus and many others did not regard Constantine’s authority as secular. On the contrary, the emperor was a God- inspired man, a true philosopher, {30} a teacher who directs his flock to heaven, and causes ‘schools of holy learning’ {31} to be set up. Church conflict is resolved by the virtual redefinition of the empire itself as a ‘school’ gathered around a charismatic royal teacher. No longer does the Church have to define itself as a pure and self- continuous community over against the world; the whole oikoumene now has its ‘bishop’ and pastor. {32}
Quote ID: 514
Time Periods: 4
Arius Heresy & Tradition
Rowan Williams
Book ID: 29 Page: 90
Section: 3C1
Before Constantine, the Church was simply not in a position to make universally binding and enforceable decisions. From Nicaea onwards the Church decided, and communicated its decisions, through the official network of the empire; it had become visible to itself, as well as to the world, in a new way. And to those concerned with enforcing agreed decisions, whether for the sake of the empire’s unity like Constantine or for the sake of theological integrity like Athanasius (and perhaps Eusebius of Nicomedia), the independent and actually or potentially recalcitrant ‘school’ group was inevitably redefined not merely as a sect, but as a body outside the framework of civilized society. The Church’s new ‘visibility’ meant that the wrong sort of Christian group was regarded pretty much as the Church itself had been regarded by the pagan empire, as something subversive of the sacred character of social life.
Quote ID: 515
Time Periods: 4
Arius Heresy & Tradition
Rowan Williams
Book ID: 29 Page: 109
Section: 3C1
Taken as a whole, these citations had apparently been used by Arius and his followers to establish three basic theological points:(i) The Son is a creature, that is, a product of God’s will;
(ii) ‘Son’ is therefore a metaphor for the second hypostasis, and must be
understood in the light of comparable metaphorical usage in Scripture;
(iii) The Son’s status, like his very existence, depends upon God’s will.
Quote ID: 516
Time Periods: 4
Arius Heresy & Tradition
Rowan Williams
Book ID: 29 Page: 177
Section: 3C1
As we have already seen, this is the theology of the Thalia – a remarkable and drastic reworking of a number of profoundly traditional themes. It is conservative in the sense that there is almost nothing in it that could not be found in earlier writers; it is radical and individual in the way it combines and reorganizes traditional ideas and presses them to their logical conclusions – God is free, the world need not exist, the Word is other than God, the Word is part of the world, so the Word is freely formed ex nihilo.
Quote ID: 517
Time Periods: 4
Arius Heresy & Tradition
Rowan Williams
Book ID: 29 Page: 247
Section: 3C1
‘Arianism’ is the polemical creation of Athanasius above all, who was determined to show that any proposed alternative to the Nicene formula collapsed back into some version of Arius’ teaching.
Quote ID: 518
Time Periods: 4
Arius, NPNF2 Vol. 3, The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret
Online Source; Fourth Century Christianity Home
Book ID: 129 Page: 1/2
Section: 3C1
Thus he drives us out of every city like godless men, since we will not agree with his public statements: that there was “always a God, always a Son;” “as soon as the Father, so soon the Son existed;” “with the Father co-exists the Son unbegotten, ever-begotten, begotten without begetting;” “God neither precedes the Son in aspect or in a moment of time;” “always a God, always a Son, the Son being from God himself.”Letter of Arius to Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia IV NPNF2 Vol. III p. 41
The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret, I.iv
Quote ID: 2911
Time Periods: 4
Arius, NPNF2 Vol. 3, The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret
Online Source; Fourth Century Christianity Home
Book ID: 129 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
Before he was begotten, or created, or defined, or established, he did not exist. For he was not unbegotten. But we are persecuted because we have said the Son has a beginning but God has no beginning. We are persecuted because of that and for saying he came from non-being. But we said this since he is not a portion of God nor of anything in existence. That is why we are persecuted; you know the rest.Letter of Arius to Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia IV NPNF2 Vol. III p. 41
The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret, I.iv
Quote ID: 2913
Time Periods: 4
Arius, NPNF2 Vol. 3, The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret
Online Source; Fourth Century Christianity Home
Book ID: 129 Page: 3
Section: 3C1
So much then for the creed which was composed at the council, to which all of us agreed, not without some questioning, but according to a specific sense, brought up before the most pious Emperor himself, and qualified by the considerations mentioned above. As far as the condemnation they attached to the end of the creed, it did not cause us pain, because it forbade the use of words not found in Scripture, from which almost all the confusion and disorder in the Church have come. Since then no divinely inspired Scripture has used the phrases, “out of nothing,” and “once he was not,” and the rest which follow, there appeared no ground for using or teaching them. We think that this was a good decision, since it has never been our custom to use these terms. - DELETE
Quote ID: 2917
Time Periods: 4
Arius, NPNF2 Vol. 3, The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret
Online Source; Fourth Century Christianity Home
Book ID: 129 Page: 3
Section: 3C1
Additionally, it did not seem out of place to condemn the statement “Before he was begotten he did not exist,” because everyone confesses that the Son of God existed before he was begotten according to the flesh. At this point in the discussion, our most pious Emperor maintained that the Son existed before all ages even according to his divinely inspired begetting, since even before the act of begetting was performed, in potentiality he was with the Father, even before he was begotten by him, since the Father is always Father, just as he is always King and always Savior; he has the potentiality to be all things, and remains exactly the same forever. - DELETETranslation from NPNF2 vol. 2, pp. 12-3, adapted by AJW
Other translations in A New Eusebius, no. 292 and NPNF2 vol. 3, p.46-7
Quote ID: 2918
Time Periods: 4
Augustine, NPNF1 Vol. 3, On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises; Moral Treatises
Philip Schaff (editor)
Book ID: 159 Page: 17
Section: 3C1
Book I.1.11. The following dissertation concerning the Trinity, as the reader ought to be informed, has been written in order to guard against the sophistries of those who disdain to begin with faith, and are deceived by a crude and perverse love of reason.
Quote ID: 3396
Time Periods: 5
Augustine, NPNF1 Vol. 3, On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises; Moral Treatises
Philip Schaff (editor)
Book ID: 159 Page: 19
Section: 3C1
Book I.2.4…the Trinity is the one and only and true God, and also how the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are rightly said, believed, understood, to be of one and the same substance or essence; …
Quote ID: 3397
Time Periods: 5
Augustine, NPNF1 Vol. 3, On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises; Moral Treatises
Philip Schaff (editor)
Book ID: 159 Page: 20
Section: 3C1
Book 1.4.7All those Catholic expounders of the divine Scriptures, both Old and New, whom I have been able to read, who have written before me concerning the Trinity, Who is God, have purposed to teach, according to the Scriptures, this doctrine, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality; {3} and therefore that they are not three Gods, but one God: although the Father hath begotten the Son, and so He who is the Father is not the Son; and the Son is begotten by the Father, and so He who is the Son is not the Father; and the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son, but only the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, Himself also co-equal with the Father and the Son, and pertaining to the unity of the Trinity.
Quote ID: 3398
Time Periods: 5
Augustine, NPNF1 Vol. 3, On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises; Moral Treatises
Philip Schaff (editor)
Book ID: 159 Page: 23
Section: 3C1
Book I.6.12And the apostle has not refrained from using the very word itself, but has said most expressly, “Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God”; using here the name of God specially of the Father; as elsewhere, “But the head of Christ is God.”
Pastor John notes: John’s note: That is a KJV translation, 1200 years later than Augustine. Did he influence the KJV?
Quote ID: 3399
Time Periods: 5
Augustine, NPNF1 Vol. 3, On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises; Moral Treatises
Philip Schaff (editor)
Book ID: 159 Page: iii
Section: 3C1
…the Orations against the Arians, by Athanasius, “the Father of Orthodoxy,” …Preface, iii
Quote ID: 3395
Time Periods: 45
Augustus to Constantine
Robert M. Grant
Book ID: 34 Page: 241
Section: 3C1
(Eusebius of Caesarea) The emperor himself, it would appear, was responsible for making one addition: the word homoousios, used to indicate that the Son was “consubstantial” with the Father. Presumably the term resulted from a compromise among eastern bishops and was intended to prevent Eusebius’ creed from being interpreted in Arian fashion. Constantine himself explained that it implied no corporeal substance or any division or separation of the Son from the Father, for the immaterial, spiritual, and incorporeal nature could not suffer any corporeal change. It was to be taken in a divine and mysterious sense, without analysis. “After our most wise and pious emperor made this philosophical statement”, says Eusebius, the bishops accepted his amendment;{34}[Footnote 34] Socrates, H. E. I, 8.
Quote ID: 653
Time Periods: 4
Augustus to Constantine
Robert M. Grant
Book ID: 34 Page: 243
Section: 3C1
In 333 Constantine made up his mind again and decided to offer a final solution to the Arian problem. The books of Arius, like those of the anti-Christian philosopher Porphyry, were to be burned; the discovery of such writings if concealed was to result in the application of the death penalty.{38} In the same year he sent a letter of denunciation to Arius and his followers, pointing out that Arius’ presence in Libya had been predicted in the Sibylline Oracles, three thousand years previously, . . .[Footnote 38] Ibid., I, 9, 30; cf. Cod. Theod. 16, 5, 66.
Quote ID: 655
Time Periods: 4
Ausonius, LCL 115: Ausonius I, Books 1-17
Several
Book ID: 133 Page: 15
Section: 3C1
Book II The Daily Round or The Doings of a Whole DayParagraph II The Interlude Line 6
I do not call for incense to be burnt nor for any slice of honey-cake: hearths of green turf I leave for the altars of vain gods. I must pray to God and to the Son of God most high, that co-equal{2} Majesty united in one fellowship with the Holy Spirit.
PJ Note: Check Ausonius for the J word.
Quote ID: 2928
Time Periods: 4
Ausonius, LCL 115: Ausonius I, Books 1-17
Several
Book ID: 133 Page: 17
Section: 2B1,3C,3C1,3D
Book II The Daily Round or the Doings of a Whole DayParagraph III The Prayer Line 6-12
He only may behold thee and, face to face, hear thy bidding and sit at thy fatherly right-hand who is himself the Maker of all things, himself the Cause of all created things, himself the Word of God, the Word which is God, who was before the world which he was to make, begotten at that time when Time was not yet, who came into being before the Sun’s beams and the bright Morning-Star enlightened the sky.
Quote ID: 2929
Time Periods: 4
Ausonius, LCL 115: Ausonius I, Books 1-17
Several
Book ID: 133 Page: xiv
Section: 2B2,3C,3C1,3D
IntroductionFurther, the conception of the Deity held by Ausonius was distinctly peculiar - as his less guarded references show. In the Easter Verses (Domest. ii. 24 ff.) the Trinity is a power transcending but not unlike the three Emperors; and in the Griphus (1. 88) the “tris deus unus” is advanced to enforce the maxim “ter bibe” in exactly the same tone as that in which the children of Rhea, or the three Gorgons are cited: for our author the Christian Deity was not essentially different from the old pagan gods.
PJ Note: Check Ausonius for the J word.
Quote ID: 2924
Time Periods: 4
Caesar and Christ: The Story of Civilization
Will Durant
Book ID: 43 Page: 659
Section: 3C1
Constantine, coming to Nicomedia after overthrowing Licinius, heard the story from its bishop. He sent both Alexander and Arius a personal appeal to imitate the calm of philosophers, to reconcile their differences peaceably, or at least to keep their debates from the public ear. The letter, preserved by Eusebius, clearly reveals Constantine’s lack of theology, and the political purpose of his religious policy.“I had proposed to lead back to a single form the ideas which all people conceive of the Deity; for I feel strongly that if I could induce men to unite on that subject, the conduct of public affairs would be considerable eased. But alas! I hear that there are more disputes among you than recently in Africa. The cause seems to be quite trifling, and unworthy of such fierce contests. You, Alexander, wished to know what your priests were thinking on a point of law, even on a portion only of a question in itself entirely devoid of importance; and you, Arius, if you had such thoughts, should have kept silence. . . . There was no need to make these questions public . . . . since they are problems that idleness alone raises, and whose only use is to sharpen men’s wits . . . these are silly actions worthy of inexperienced children, and not of priests or reasonable men.”{46}
The letter had no effect. To the Church the question of the “consubstantiality” (homoousia) as against the mere similarity (homoiousia) of the Son and the Father was vital both theologically and politically.
Quote ID: 948
Time Periods: 4
Caesar and Christ: The Story of Civilization
Will Durant
Book ID: 43 Page: 659
Section: 3C1
As the controversy spread, setting the Greek East aflame, Constantine resolved to end it by calling the first ecumenical—universal—council of the Church. He summoned all bishops to meet in 325 at Bithynian Nicaea, near his capital Nicomedia, and provided funds for all their expenses. Not less than 318 bishops came, “attended” says one of them, “by a vast concourse of the lower clergy”: {47} the statement reveals the immense growth of the Church.
Quote ID: 949
Time Periods: 4
Caesar and Christ: The Story of Civilization
Will Durant
Book ID: 43 Page: 660
Section: 3C1
The Council also decreed that all churches should celebrate Easter on the same day, to be named in each year by the Bishop of Alexandria according to an astronomical rule, and to be promulgated by the Bishop of Rome. On the question of clerical celibacy the Council inclined to require continence of married priests; but Paphnutius, Bishop of Upper Thebes, persuaded his peers to leave unchanged the prevailing custom, which forbade marriage after ordination, but permitted a priest to cohabit with a wife whom he had married before ordination. {50}
Quote ID: 950
Time Periods: 4
Caesar and Christ: The Story of Civilization
Will Durant
Book ID: 43 Page: 661
Section: 3C1
At the same time it marked the replacement of paganism with Christianity as the religious expression and support of the Roman Empire, and committee Constantine to a more definite alliance with Christianity than ever before. A new civilization, based on a new religion, would now rise over the ruins of an exhausted culture and a dying creed. The Middle Ages had begun.
Quote ID: 951
Time Periods: 4
Christian Initiation and Baptism in the Holy Spirit: Evidence from the First Eight Centuries
Kilian McDonnell and George T. Montague
Book ID: 53 Page: 133/134
Section: 3C1
Purporting to be citing the western view, George Scholarius, the fifteenth-century Byzantine scholar, wrote: “Where Origen was good, no one was better; where he was bad, no one is worse.” {3}Pastor John notes: John’s note: ha!
….
At least Jerome, that sometime friend, was convinced that Origen had spawned the heresy of Arius,{4}
….
4 Letter 84, To Pachomius and Oceanus 4; CSEL 55:125, 126.
Quote ID: 1175
Time Periods: 345
Christian Initiation and Baptism in the Holy Spirit: Evidence from the First Eight Centuries
Kilian McDonnell and George T. Montague
Book ID: 53 Page: 166
Section: 3C1
Jerome, too, in his translation of Eusebius’ Chronology named Phrygia as the place of banishment and added that while there Hilary wrote.{70} Exile had become the favorite tool against adherents of the Nicaean definition that the Son was “of the same substance” (homousios) as the Father. Hilary, who had been chosen bishop about 354, may have written the first three books of On the Trinity while still in Gaul, finishing it during his exile in Asia.{71}
Quote ID: 1183
Time Periods: 45
Christian Liturgy: Catholic and Evangelical
Frank C. Senn
Book ID: 54 Page: 36/37
Section: 3C1
Jungmann also showed how anti-Arian concerns prompted the church to shift the role of Christ from mediator of worship to object of worship. This is seen especially in the doxological conclusion of prayers. We have seen examples of early Christian prayers which are addressed to God the Father “through Jesus Christ, your Son, our Lord.” The Arians, who held that the Son is subordinate to the Father, could justify their position by appealing to the public prayers of the church. The result was that prayer formularies were changed to stress the co-equality of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. So, if we may take this one formula as an example, a doxology such as “Gloria Patri per Filium in Spiritu Sancto” (Glory to the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit) was changed to “Gloria Patri et Filio et Spiritui Sancto” (Glory to the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit). In a similar way, Catholics in Spain during the fifth century, in reaction to the Arian Visigoths, began adding to the termination of Latin collects, “through Jesus Christ, your Son, our Lord,” the expansion “who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, forever and ever.” The result of these changes, according to Jungmann, was that “stress was now placed not on what unites us to God (Christ as one of us in his human nature, Christ our brother), but on what separates us from God (God’s infinite majesty).”
Quote ID: 1211
Time Periods: 45
Christian Liturgy: Catholic and Evangelical
Frank C. Senn
Book ID: 54 Page: 39
Section: 3C1
A true theology of Christian liturgy must be rooted in a theology of the holy Trinity.
Quote ID: 1212
Time Periods: ?
Christian Liturgy: Catholic and Evangelical
Frank C. Senn
Book ID: 54 Page: 46
Section: 3C1
Orthodoxia means “right praise” or “true worship” as well as “right opinion.” But, of course, the praise and worship is “right” only if it is directed to the right God. Orthodox liturgy is that which prays to and worships the Holy Trinity.
Quote ID: 1213
Time Periods: ?
Christians as the Romans Saw Them, The
Robert L. Wilken
Book ID: 201 Page: 160
Section: 2B,3C1
Christians feared Porphyry’s Philosophy from Oracles because it was the first work to give a positive appraisal of Jesus within the framework of pagan religion. Precisely at the time Porphyry was writing his book, Christian leaders were on the verge of a major dispute about the status of Christ. Shortly afterward, the Arian controversy exploded and Christian bishops became engaged in a far-reaching debate about whether Jesus was fully divine and equal to the one supreme God. It would be stretching the point to say that some of the Christian bishops would have agreed with Porphyry’s view of Christ. But many of them, among whom was Eusebius of Caesarea, were very reluctant to consider Jesus as divine in the same sense that God the creator was divine. Indeed, the controversy, which was to divide the Christian world for several generations, centered precisely on that issue: Was Jesus to be thought of as fully God, equal to one high God? Or was he a lesser deity, who, though sharing an intimate relation to God the Father, was nevertheless in the second rank?
Quote ID: 4595
Time Periods: 23
Church, State, and Citizen: Christian Approaches to Political Engagement
Edited by Sandra F. Joireman
Book ID: 60 Page: 37
Section: 3C1
Nevertheless, because Luther pronounced himself in fundamental agreement with the Roman Catholic Church on the central doctrine of the Holy Trinity, he saw himself as a reformer, not a revolutionary.{3} To Luther, the absolute anchor to Christianity was the doctrine of the Trinity, which articulated the nature of the God in which true Christians professed their faith. The Catholic Church, Luther acknowledged, had created a global Christendom (the church universal) in its defense of the Trinity against the heresies of the early church and against the Eastern Orthodox schismatics later on. He did not see his famous theses, or central beliefs, grounding them, then, as corrosive of the basic worldwide Catholic solidarity.
Quote ID: 1518
Time Periods: ?
Civilizations of the Middle Ages: A Completely Revised and Expanded Edition of Medieval History, The
Norman F. Cantor
Book ID: 203 Page: 57
Section: 3C1
Constantine had been baptized on his deathbed by an Arian bishop, and his sons who succeeded him tended to be sympathetic to the Arian cause. By the fifth decade of the fourth century, the situation had become critical for orthodoxy. All the voices that could be raised in favor of the Nicene Creed or in protest against the intrusion of the prince in ecclesiastical matters were silenced by the state.
Quote ID: 4673
Time Periods: 4
Climax of Rome, The
Michael Grant
Book ID: 204 Page: 211/212
Section: 3C1
Nor did those of another thinker on similar lines, the Alexandrian priest Arius (d. 336). The emphasis of these philosophically trained apologists on the humanity of Jesus, with consequent depreciation of his divinity, reached its culmination in his work. Brought up on Origen’s doctrine of the singleness of God, Arius, like Unitarians of later times, regarded Christ as distant from God and inferior and, although created before all time, in a sense posterior: he could even have sinned—although, because of his free-will, he did not. The influence of Arius was strong at Licinius’ court, which turned against the church when that took a different view (320). Constantine called the Council of Nicaea (325) and promoted its Creed in order to achieve a consensus, but the result was Arius’ excommunication: though his doctrine became temporarily dominant after both he and the emperor were dead, {16} and later prevailed in the leading Germanic kingdoms of Italy and the west.
Quote ID: 4755
Time Periods: 34
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 5
Section: 3C1
What Thomas now upholds is the final solution to the issue, the doctrine of the Trinity. God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinct persons within a single Godhead. It is a doctrine, as Thomas himself wrote in his other great work, the Summa theologiae, that cannot be upheld by reason, but only through faith.
Quote ID: 4787
Time Periods: ?
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 163/164
Section: 3C1
Few areas of church history have been so completely rewritten in the past twenty years as the “Arian controversy.” Traditionally church historians have suggested that an “orthodox” understanding, which accepted Jesus the Son as divine and fully part of the Godhead, was already in place by the 320s and that Arius challenged this “orthodoxy” with his claim that Jesus had been created as “Son” thus distinct from a pre-existing god and subordinate to him as Father. This tradition relied heavily on the main contemporary source for Arianism, the polemical anti-Arian writings of Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria from 328 to 373.
Quote ID: 4828
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 164
Section: 3C1
Recently, however, historians have begun to decode Arianism. They have found that the movement Athanasius dubbed “Arian” was much broader and more complex than Athanasius had suggested and had a great deal of scriptural and theological backing.
Quote ID: 4829
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 165
Section: 3C1
As Richard Hanson has written: “Indeed, until Athanasius began writing every single theologian, east and west, had postulated some form of Subordinationism...it could, about the year 300, have been described as a fixed part of catholic the word being used here in the sense of universal theology.
Quote ID: 4830
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 166
Section: 3C1
So when Arius challenged Alexander, he believed he was representing a theological position that could be cogently justified, with philosophy and tradition backing the scriptures.
Quote ID: 4831
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 166
Section: 3C1
This was the controversy facing Constantine, threatening his dreams of political stability. Used to the more fluid spiritual allegiances of the Roman world, he could not believe that such “idle and trivial” speculations could cause so much unrest.
Quote ID: 4832
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 167
Section: 3C1
Constantine had to act if he was to achieve any stable support from the Christians, and so he took the initiative in calling a council of bishops at which he could enforce an agreed definition of Christian doctrine to be backed by the state. So was initiated the process by which church doctrine was decided in councils of bishops called under the auspices of the emperor; all church councils up to the eighth century conformed to this model.
Quote ID: 4833
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 167
Section: 3C1
With almost no exceptions they were easterners--such debates had largely bypassed the Latin-speaking Christians. The bishop of Rome was represented only by observers.
Quote ID: 4834
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 168
Section: 3C1
Plotinus had indeed used the word ousia, substance, to describe the common attributes of “the One,” the nous, and world-soul, but it seems only to have been later in the century, in the writings of the Cappadocian Fathers (see below, pp. 188-89), that Plotinus’ terminology entered Christian theology.
Quote ID: 4835
Time Periods: 34
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 171
Section: 3C1
When Constantine himself was finally baptized it was at the hands of an Arian bishop, Eusebius of Nicomedia (not be be confused with the Eusebius who was Constantine’s biographer).
Quote ID: 4836
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 171
Section: 3C1
Those impressed by Constantine’s adoption of a Christian God might have hoped that he would have adopted Christian ethics. However, he appears to have shown no interest in the message of the Gospels. Rather, he attempts to use Christianity as a means of bringing order to society.
Quote ID: 4837
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 186
Section: 3C1
His professional career was one of some turmoil. Appointed bishop in 428, he is known, from Egyptian papyri, to have enforced his authority with violence and to have been challenged on his right to hold his see. On no less than five occasions, and for a total of fifteen of the forty-five years he was bishop, he was in exile, sent there by emperors (including, as we have seen, Constantine, who took exception to his anti-Arian intransigence) and his fellow bishops.
Quote ID: 4856
Time Periods: 45
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 187
Section: 3C1
However, for many years Athanasius, like his fellow theologians, avoided using the charged word homoousios to describe the relationship, and it does not appear in his work until about 356.
Quote ID: 4857
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 187
Section: 3C1
He created an elaborate distinction between the human body of Jesus, which appears to suffer, as when on the cross, and the divine logos, which is somehow inside the human body but does not suffer. So, for instance, the mind of Jesus, which he allocated to the logos rather than to his body, could not feel anything and was not even subject to moral dilemmas. “He was not subject to moral law, he did not weigh two choices, preferring one, rejecting another,” as Athanasius put it. This goes as far as suggesting that Jesus lacked free will.
Quote ID: 4858
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 188
Section: 3C1
In the west the Nicene cause was furthered by a number of formidable protagonists, of whom Hilary of Poitiers was the most celebrated.
Quote ID: 4859
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 188
Section: 3C1
He developed his ideas in De Trinitate, probably the first full defence in Latin (Athanasius wrote only in Greek) of the doctrine of God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as a single Godhead.
Quote ID: 4860
Time Periods: 5
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 188/189
Section: 3C1
The challenge for those who wished to revive the Nicene formula was to find a means of differentiating the Father and the Son that did not compromise their sharing of the same substance. It was the so-called Cappadocian Fathers, Basil of Caesarea (d. 379) and his brother Gregory of Nyssa (d.c. 395), together with another Gregory, of Nazianzus (d. 390), who came up with a solution that eventually was to be accepted. There is one Godhead, of uniform substance, ousia (in other words, the Cappadocians accepted the homoousios), but the Godhead has three distinct hypostaseis, or personalities.
Quote ID: 4861
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 188
Section: 3C1
In the west the Nicene cause was furthered by a number of formidable protagonists, of whom Hilary of Poitiers was the most celebrated.Duplicate of quote 4859.
Quote ID: 4863
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 188
Section: 3C1
He developed his ideas in De Trinitate, probably the first full defence in latin (Athanasius wrote only in Greek) of the doctrine of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit as a single Godhead.
Quote ID: 4864
Time Periods: 5
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 188/189
Section: 3C1
The challenge for those who wished to revive the Nicene formula was to find a means of differentiating the Father and Son that did not compromise their sharing of the same substance. It was the so-called Cappadocian Fathers, Basil of Caesarea (d. 379) and his brother Gregory of Nyssa (d.c. 395) together with another Gregory, of Nazianzus (d. 390), who came up with a solution that eventually was to be accepted. There is one Godhead, of uniform substance, ousia (in other words, the Cappadocians accepted the Homoousios), but the Godhead has three distinct hypostaseis, or personalities.
Quote ID: 4865
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 189
Section: 4A,3C1
The Cappadocian Fathers are an attractive trio. All were steeped in classical philosophy, Gregory of Nazianzus declaring that Athens, where he and Basil had studied, was “a city truly of gold and the patroness of all that is good.”
Quote ID: 4862
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 189
Section: 3C1
Although this remains a matter of scholarly dispute, Basil’s inspiration for the terminology of the Trinity appears to have been the Neoplatonist philosopher Plotinus. As we have seen, Plotinus had proposed three entities in his metaphysical system: “the One”; nous, or Intellect, which presents the Platonic Forms to the material world; and the World-Soul. In his Enneads, published early in the fourth century, parts of which Basil of Caesarea is known to have studied in detail, Plotinus had argued that each one of these three entities had a distinct hypostasis, or personality, although they also shared a likeness, “as light is from the sun” (“the ousia of the divine extends to the three hypostases, namely the supreme god, the nous, the world soul“). As we have noted, Plotinus even used the word homoousios to describe the relationship of identity between the three.
Quote ID: 4868
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 190
Section: 3C1
Thus Greek philosophical terms, in themselves complex, were adapted and adopted to produce a solution that allowed the Nicene formula to be reasserted and the Holy Spirit integrated into the Trinity without reverting to Sabellianism. The doctrine of the Trinity is embedded so deeply in the Christian tradition that it is easy to forget how precarious was its birth. To the Cappadocians, in fact, it seems to have been a compromise formula.
Quote ID: 4869
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 190
Section: 3C1
One can understand why the concept of the Trinity was so difficult for many to accept. There is comparatively little in scripture that can be used to support the idea in its final form. The terminology of Father and Son used in the Synoptic Gospels, in fact, suggests a Jesus who saw himself as genuinely distinct from his “Father.”
Quote ID: 4870
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 190/191
Section: 3C1
Basil had to fall back on “the unwritten tradition of the fathers” and “reason” to make his case. One particular challenge was that the only use in scripture of the term hypostasis in a context in which the Father was related to the Son refers to the Son as “a perfect copy of his God the Father’s hypostasis” (Hebrews 1:3), in other words denying the distinction between them which the Cappadocians had so painstakingly formulated.
Quote ID: 4871
Time Periods: 4
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 191
Section: 3C1
Was it acceptable, however, simply to manipulate pagan philosophical concepts in this way to create Christian truth? Even Thomas Aquinas--himself highly ingenious in finding reasoned support for Christian doctrine--admitted that “it is impossible to arrive at a cognition of the Trinity of the Divine Persons by means of natural reason.” It must, Thomas continues, be taken as a revelation from God. When challenged themselves, the Cappadocians fell back on claims of the ultimate mystery of these things. As Gregory of Nazianzus retorted to one critic who had asked him to explain “proceeding”: “You explain how it was impossible for the Father to be generated and I will give you a biological account of the Son’s begetting and the Spirit’s proceeding--and let us go mad the pair of us for prying into God’s secrets!” Basil argued that ultimately faith must be given primacy.
Quote ID: 4872
Time Periods: ?
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 192
Section: 3C1
Pelikan shrewdly remarks, the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity did not lead to any greater knowledge of God. It just increased the extent to which he was unknowable!
Quote ID: 4873
Time Periods: ?
Closing of the Western Mind, The
Charles Freeman
Book ID: 205 Page: 295
Section: 3A2,3C1
However, the works of Athanasius and the edicts of 380 and 381 enforcing Trinitarian orthodoxy were loaded with condemnation of “heretics.” It was Augustine who developed a rationale of persecution.
Quote ID: 4981
Time Periods: 45
Complete Sermons of Martin Luther Volume 5, The
Edited by Eugene F. A. Klug
Book ID: 338 Page: 269
Section: 3C1
FIFTH SUNDAY AFTER EPIPHANYAfter the apostolic age, during the days when bishops ruled, matters got much worse; there were but few bishops and teachers like Cyprian, Hilary, Athanasius, and others, through whom Christ sowed good seed. On the other hand, the devil had many thousands of false bishops, Arians, and other heretics through whom he sowed nothing but tares.
Quote ID: 7858
Time Periods: ?
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 176
Section: 3C1
Between writing On Philosophy from Oracles and Against the Christians, Porphyry abandoned this optimistic integration of Christianity into Greco-Roman culture. He began to fear that the Greeks and their gods were seriously endangered; he abandoned any desire for synthesis, claimed that Christianity and Greek culture were fundamentally incompatible, and transformed his favorable evaluation of Jesus into systematic denigration.
Quote ID: 1594
Time Periods: 34
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 203/204
Section: 3C1
Nor was the Son part of the Father, of one substance with the Father; that was an error of Mani-whom Arius, significantly, regards as a Christian heretic.
Quote ID: 1605
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 204
Section: 3C1
This council drew up a creed which repudiated Arius’ novel views. When Arius and others refused to accept this document, the council excommunicated them and banished them from Alexandria. {135}
Quote ID: 1606
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 204
Section: 3C1
Arius claimed that he had been unjustly banished from Alexandria because of his refusal to assert publicly that the Son is coeternal with the Father; he further claimed to have the support of almost all eastern bishops . . .
Quote ID: 1607
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 206
Section: 3C1
Eusebius of Caesarea perhaps reacted to the circular letter by convening a council of bishops in Palestine to intervene again in Arius’ behalf. {152}
Quote ID: 1608
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 212
Section: 3C1
The Arian controversy forced itself on his attention just at the periodwhen he most wished to concentrate on converting pagans to Christianity. By 324 not only were bishops denouncing one another, but congregations were divided into two parties, and in the theater pagans taunted Christians about their dissensions. {27}
Quote ID: 1614
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 213
Section: 3C1
Moreover, as Ossius letter to Emperor Constantine was returning to court, he discovered that the church of Antioch was in total disorder. {36} The bishop, Philogonius, had died on 20 December 324, and rioting ensued over the election of his successor.The bishops acted decisively to support Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, and they adopted an intricately phrased creed which defined orthodox belief. All the bishops present except three declared that this formulary represented the true apostolic teaching necessary for salvation. The recusants were Theodotus of Laodicea, Narcissus of Neronias, and Eusebius of Caesarea. Ossius interrogated them one by one; the council pronounced their views heretical and excommunicated all three.
Quote ID: 1615
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 214
Section: 3C1
The council never met at Ancyra. Constantine transferred it to Nicaea and perhaps enlarged its scope so that it became the first “ecumenical council” of the Christian church. {39}
Quote ID: 1616
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 214
Section: 3C1
They basked in the light of a new glory. Bishops converged on Nicaea,nearly three hundred in all; the emperor allowed them free use of the cursus publicus, and he paid their living expenses during the council. {49}
Quote ID: 1619
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 214/215
Section: 3C1
Prestige did not depend mainly on a bishop’s see nor on his subtlety in debate. Confessors, especially those whose missing eyes and maimed ankles manifested proof of their steadfastness during the persecution, enjoyed enormous authority. {52} Important contributions also came from some who were not technically members of the council. The bishop of Alexandria received advice throughout the proceedings from his deacon Athanasius, {53} and Constantine, though not even a baptized Christian, participated in the debates. {54}
Quote ID: 1620
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 215
Section: 3C1
On the other side, the bishops who had been provisionally excommunicated at Antioch set out to rehabilitate themselves. Eusebius of Caesarea drew up a formal creed to prove his orthodoxy, which he tendered to the council. {57} In it he affirmed that “the Father is truly Father, the Son truly Son, and the Holy Spirit truly Holy Spirit,”
Quote ID: 1621
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 215
Section: 3C1
At a sign, all stood. Constantine entered, clad in the imperial purple, with a diadem and insignia of gold and diamonds. He advanced as far as the first seats in each row. A small stool of wood encrusted with gold was produced. After requesting permission from the bishops, Constantine sat down; the rest followed suit. {60} The bishop immediately to his left, Eusebius of Nicomedia, rose and delivered a panegyrical address of welcome. {61} After Eusebius resumed his seat, Constantine replied briefly and formally in Latin.He expressed gratitude to God for allowing him to see the bishops assembled together in concord, and he deprecated violent dissension within the Church as more lamentable than even civil war. Could the Devil sully the Church even after all the persecutors had been destroyed? His own victories in war could be fully complete only when the consecrated servants of God united in peace and harmony. They should, therefore, state their disagreements openly in order to achieve a peaceful resolution of their differences, for only thus could they please God and show adequate gratitude to their liberator. {62} An interpreter translated the speech into Greek. {63}When Constantine finished (it appears), he received petitions from the bishops, many of whom had already approached him privately with accusations against one another. He sat with the petitions (which were later burned) in his lap and reproved the bishops for letting private animosities interfere with God’s business. {64}
Quote ID: 1622
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 216
Section: 3C1
The council considered the Arian controversy first. Eusebius of Caesarea and two other bishops had arrived in Nicaea under a provisional ban of excommunication. Eusebius presented the previously prepared document as proof of his orthodoxy. His enemies could find no obvious blunder in this creed and its glosses. Constantine spoke first; he commended Eusebius’ beliefs as orthodox, almost identical, in fact, with his own, and surely acceptable to all–if Eusebius would only add that the Son was one substance with the Father. {72} Eusebius accepted the condition, unpalatable though he found it. {73} He thereby created a dilemma for his enemies. They were compelled either to receive Eusebius, whom they still considered heretical, back into communion or to brand Constantine as a heretic for sharing the unorthodox beliefs of the bishop of Caesarea. Eusebius, Theodotus, and Narcissus were admitted to membership of the council.
Quote ID: 1623
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 217
Section: 3C1
Only the two Libyan bishops associated with Arius from the outset (Secundus of Ptolemais and Theonas of Marmarica) refused to sign; they departed into immediate exile, together with Arius and some priests who also refused to repudiate his views. {82}
Quote ID: 1624
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 219
Section: 3C1
The decisions of the Council of Nicaea were communicated not only through synodal letters (as was the normal custom) but also by Constantine.….
In adding, his letters to those of the bishops, Constantine deliberately emphasized his role as a Christian emperor bringing unity and concord to a divided Church.
Quote ID: 1627
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 225
Section: 3C1
When Constantine died in 337, though the heresiarch was dead, Arius’ supporters enjoyed a supremacy in the eastern Church which appeared almost complete.
Quote ID: 1633
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 226
Section: 3C1
While the Council of Nicaea was still in session, Eusebius of Caesarea wrote a letter which reveals deep embarrassment. He needed to explain his acceptance of the creed and its anathemas to his congregation, because many in Caesarea were likely to consider his action both unexpected and unwelcome. His letter asks its recipients to disregard any rumors which may have reached them. Eusebius promises an accurate account of what has happened. He presents the facts, however, in a highly selective and misleading fashion.
Quote ID: 1634
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 226
Section: 3C1
Throughout the letter he shelters behind the authority of Constantine, whose presence and role at the council he continually recalls.
Quote ID: 1635
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 227
Section: 3C1
Constantine also wrote to Theodotus of Laodicea to dissuade him from imitating the behavior of his former allies - a revealing letter, for it assumes that compliance with the Nicene decisions determines whether a believer shall hereafter gain rewards in heaven or punishment in hell. {16}
Quote ID: 1636
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 227
Section: 3C1
About two years after the Council of Nicaea, a council of bishops met at Antioch and conducted a purge in the Arian interest. {22}Pastor John notes: John’s note: 327 in reference to the year
Quote ID: 1637
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 227/228
Section: 3C1
By 330, therefore, the metropolitan see of Antioch was firmly in the Arian camp, and Flaccillus could ensure that any new bishop in Syria would sympathize with the Arian cause. {38}
Quote ID: 1638
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 231
Section: 3C1
Constantine, asking that they a group of Melitian bishops be permitted to hold meetings without violent disruption.….
Eusebius brought them before Constantine, explained their request, and obtained his permission for them to meet without hindrance.{ 63}
Quote ID: 1639
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 232/233
Section: 3C1
He [Arius] presented Constantine with an ultimatum: either he must be restored to communion, as the Council of Nicomedia had decreed, or he would form his large following into a separate church. {74} Accustomed to servility, not to threats or coercion, Constantine lost his temper.---------------
The circular letter declares that Arians should be called Porphyrians, since Arius has shown himself as much an enemy of Christianity as Porphyry; Arius’ writings must be burned, and anyone who secretes a copy shall be liable to summary execution. {76}
Quote ID: 1640
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 233
Section: 3C1
Why such ire? Arius (it emerges) included in his letter a statement of his beliefs which offended Constantine profoundly. For Arius affirmed that the Son had “a different substance (hypostasis)” from the Father. Constantine reaffirms his strong conviction that the Father and Son had “one essence (ousia)” and scolds Arius for surrendering the persons of the Divine Trinity. Arius has asserted a belief anathematized at Nicaea; he is again, therefore, an excommunicate, no matter how many adherents he can claim.
Quote ID: 1641
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 242
Section: 3C1
Constantine again examined Arius and questioned him about the sincerity with which he subscribed to the views he professed. When Arius swore an oath, the emperor again pronounced him orthodox. The Arian bishops then requested Alexander to communicate with Arius.
Quote ID: 1643
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and Eusebius
Timothy D. Barnes
Book ID: 64 Page: 242
Section: 3C1
Before he could reach the church, Arius collapsed and died. His enemies inevitably detected the hand of God, and it was claimed that Constantine deduced that Arius must have lied to him about his true beliefs. {153}
Quote ID: 1644
Time Periods: 4
Constantine and the Bishops: The Politics of Intolerance
H.A. Drake
Book ID: 65 Page: 6
Section: 3C1
Athanasius was fortunate to have been recognized, for disrupting imperial processions was a risky gambit. Just one overzealous guard, and the voice of Nicene orthodoxy might have been stilled forever.
Quote ID: 1665
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 167/168
Section: 3C1
The second ’heresy’ which put an end to his dream of imperial Christian unity was Arianism. Its founder, Arius, probably a Libyan by birth, possessed a genius for propaganda, became a prebyter at Alexandria, and in c.319-22 started to propagate his views.
Quote ID: 1745
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 168
Section: 3C1
But what caused all the controversy was that Arius seemed to be making the terrible observation that Jesus had not got quite the same qualifications as his divine Father. For what Arius maintained was that the Son, although created before time and superior to other creatures, was like them changeable - the Gospels represent him as subject to growth and change - and consequently different in Essence from the Father. For ’there was a time when Jesus was not’: so that he cannot, therefore, himself be God, to whom he is in a sense posterior. That is what caused the storm, the most passionate storm that ever convulsed the Christian world, since it seemed to reduce the Son to a status that was less than divine.
Quote ID: 1746
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 168
Section: 3C1
But Arius’ exact views, and teachings, have been the subject of extensive debate. This was how Socrates Scholasticus described his opinions:On one occasion at a gathering of his presbyters and the rest of the clergy, he [bishop Alexander of Alexandria] essayed a rather ambitious theological discussion on the Holy Trinity. But one of the presbyters, Arius by name, a man not lacking in dialectic, thinking that the bishop was expounding the doctrine of Sabellius the Libyan, from love of controversy espoused a view diametrically opposed to the teaching of the Libyan, attacked the statements of the bishop with energy. ’If, said he, ’the Father begot the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence: hence it is clear that there was when the Son was not’.
Quote ID: 1747
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 169
Section: 3C1
But Arius’ enemies maintained that such opinions undermined the entire basis of Christianity, founded on the divinity of Jesus.
Quote ID: 1748
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 169
Section: 3C1
The most abstruse theological controversies excited ferocious passions. Gregory of Nyssa remarked that one could not talk to a shopkeeper in the market place, or to an attendant in the public baths, without getting involved in a theological discussion, and very often the discussion was about the matter mentioned above, the relationship of the Son to the Father.
Quote ID: 1749
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 171
Section: 3C1
And Arius ought to have kept quiet. Questions and answers alike, Constantine went on, were the products of a quarrelsome state of mind created by not having enough to do.
Quote ID: 1752
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 171
Section: 3C1
For such investigations, which no legal necessity imposes, but the frivolity of an idle hour provokes, we should, even if they are made for the sake of a philosophic exercise, lock up within our hearts and not bring forward into public gathering or entrust imprudently to the ears of the people.....
Quote ID: 1753
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 172
Section: 3C1
Excommunicated in 323 (by initiative of his infuriated bishop Alexander), Arius was condemned by the Synod of Antioch (late 324), presided over by Ossius. And it was with the intention of following up this initiative that, in the following year, Constantine convoked the Christian bishops to the First Council of Nicaea, the first ’ecumenical’ Council, transferred from Ancyra (Ankara), which was less conveniently situated (and too far from the possible plotting by the defeated Licinius which Constantine may at first have feared).
Quote ID: 1754
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 173
Section: 3C1
On somebody’s advice - probably that of Ossius once again - Constantine decided to pronounce that Jesus was homoousios with God, ’of one substance’.
Quote ID: 1755
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 173
Section: 3C1
So this was the Nicene Creed that eventually emerged, after redrafting to include the term homoousios:
Quote ID: 1756
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 174
Section: 3A2A,3C1
And after the Council of Nicaea the official church took over the church of St. George (S. Giorgio Maggiore) at Mediolanum (Milan) from the Arians who had constructed it.Despite widespread doubts among those present at Nicaea, only two of them failed to accept this definition, whereupon, like Arius himself, they were condemned to excommunication -although three others, too, wrote in, shortly afterwards, to say that they wished to repudiate the acceptance of the term that they had offered at the time.
Quote ID: 1757
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 174
Section: 3C1
Nevertheless, the emperor felt able to declare that the decisions at Nicaea were divinely inspired, and that they mirrored the judgment of God.
Quote ID: 1758
Time Periods: 4
Constantine the Great
Michael Grant
Book ID: 66 Page: 176
Section: 3C,3C1
A decisive point in Athanasius’ fight against the Arians occurred in the same year, when Arius died in a lavatory at Constantinople: which his enemies, such as Athanasius, proclaimed as a sign of God’s anger. But Arius’ death did not end his influence; and indeed Arianism had destroyed imperial unity as completely as Donatism had done, though for different reasons. Constantine’s idea that the adoption of Christianity would unify the empire had proved totally mistaken. And indeed Arianism itself had a significant future, being embraced by the emperor’s own son Constantius II as the best means of accommodating the church to the imperial state:....
Quote ID: 1759
Time Periods: 4
Continuity and Change in Roman Religion
J. H. W. G. Liebeschuetz
Book ID: 313 Page: 264
Section: 3C1,2B1
The divinity of Jesus had to be reconciled with monotheism, but this was not difficult to do convincingly. After all, philosophers had managed to reconcile the infinite variety of gods of traditional religion with a monotheist picture of the world. Certainly Lactantius {*} insists on the divinity of the Son. ‘He who worships the Father only does not worship him at all, since he does not worship the Son. But he who receives the Son and bears his name, he together with the Son worships the Father also, since the Son is the ambassador and messenger and priest of the Father.’{1}. . . .
Nevertheless, the claim made for Jesus was basically a familiar one. Seen in this way, he could take his place naturally in the long line of moral philosophers whose memory was held in high honour by educated Greeks and Romans. In fact this ‘theology’ would have been more acceptable to a pagan than to a well-informed Christian. Moreover, Lactantius’ God consists of two persons not three. There is no mention of the Holy Ghost.
John’s note: * Lactantius c. 250 – c. 325
{1} Div. Inst. iv. 29.
PJ: Three in one.
Quote ID: 7617
Time Periods: 34
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 1
Section: 3C1
Reason why two Councils were called.*John’s note: in 358 by the Emperor Constantius*
….
Proceedings at Seleucia….
Quote ID: 8821
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 1
Section: 3C1
These men who had always been of the Arian party,…influenced some who seemed to be somewhat, and the Emperor Constantius among them, being a heretic, on some pretence about the Faith, to call a Council; under the idea that they should be able to put into the shade the Nicene Council, and prevail upon all to turn round, and to establish irreligion everywhere instead of the Truth.
Quote ID: 8822
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 3
Section: 3C1
…the sentiments of their heresy are novel, and were not before. But if they add of the Catholic Faith,’ they fall before they know it into the extravagance of the Phrygians, and say with them, To us first was revealed,’ and from us dates the Faith of Christians.’ And as those inscribe it with the names of Maximilla and Montanus, so do these with Constantius, Master,’ instead of Christ.
Quote ID: 8823
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 3/4
Section: 3C1,3C2
5. As to the Nicene Council, it was not a common meeting, but convened upon a pressing necessity, and for a reasonable object. The Syrians, Cilicians, and Mesopotamians, were out of order in celebrating the Feast, and kept Easter with the Jews; on the other hand, the Arian heresy had risen up against the Catholic Church, and found supporters in Eusebius and his fellows, who were both zealous for the heresy, and conducted the attack upon religious people. This gave occasion for an Ecumenical Council, that the feast might be everywhere celebrated on one day, and that the heresy which was spring up might be anathematized.*John’s note: Even though the Trinity controversy is the point of this document, and though the subject has already been mentioned, the first reason for the Council is still the correct date for Easter.*
Quote ID: 8824
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 5/6
Section: 3C1
And, while the whole assembly was discussing the matter from the Divine Scriptures, these men produced a paper, and, reading out the Consulate, they demanded that it should be preferred to every Council, and that no questions should be put to the heretics beyond it, nor inquiry made into their meaning, but that it should be sufficient by itself;--and what they had written ran as follows:—The Catholic faith was published in the presence of our Master the most religious and gloriously victorious Emperor, Constantius, Augustus, the eternal and august, in the Consulate of the most illustrious Flavii, Eusebius and Hypatius, in Sirmium on the 11th of the Calends of June.
We believe in one Only and True God, the Father Almighty, Creator and Framer of all things:
And in one Only-begotten Son of God, who, before all ages, and before all origin, and before all conceivable time, and before all comprehensible essence, was begotten impassibly from God: through whom the ages were disposed and all things were made; and Him begotten as the Only-begotten, Only from the Only Father, God from God, like to the Father who begat Him, according to the Scriptures; whose origin no-one knoweth save the Father alone who begot Him. We know that He, the Only-begotten Son of God, at the Father’s bidding came from the heavens for the abolishment of sin, and was born of the Virgin Mary, and conversed with the disciple, and fulfilled the Economy according to the Father’s will, and was crucified, and died and descended into the parts beneath the earth, and regulated the things there, Whom the gatekeepers of hell saw (Job xxxviii. 17, LXX.) and shuddered; and He rose from the dead the third day, and conversed with the disciples, and fulfilled all 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 glory of the Father, to render to every one according to is works.
And in the Holy Ghost, whom the Only-begotten of God Himself, Jesus Christ, had promised to send to the race of men, the Paraclete, as it is written, I go to my 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’ (Job. xiv. 16, 17, 26;xvi. 14). But whereas the term essence,’ has been adopted by the Fathers in simplicity, and gives offence as being misconceived by the people, and is not contained in the Scriptures, it has seemed good to remove it, that it be never in any case used of God again, because the divine Scriptures nowhere use it of Father and Son. But we say that the Son is like the Father in all things, as also the Holy Scriptures say and teach.
Quote ID: 8825
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 10
Section: 3C1
…Acacius and his fellows, acting with the boldness of desperation, altogether denied the Nicene formula, and censured the Council, while the others, who were the majority, accepted the whole proceedings of the Council, except that they complained of the word Coessential,’ as obscure and so open to suspicion. When then time passed, and the accusers pressed, and the accused put in pleas, and thereby were led on further by their irreligion and blasphemed the Lord, thereupon the majority of Bishops became indignant, and deposed Acacius, Patrophilus, Uranius, Eudoxius, and George the contractor, and others from Asia, Leontius, and Theodosius, Evagrius and Theodulus, and excommunicated Asterius, Eusebius, Augarus, Basilicus, Phoebus, Fidelius, Eutychius, and Magnus. And this they did on their non-appearance, when summoned to defend themselves on charges which numbers preferred against them.….
And this was the termination of the Council in Seleucia.
Quote ID: 8826
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 10
Section: 3C1
…the Ario-maniacs….
Quote ID: 8827
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 11
Section: 3C1
And, as quarrelling with the Council of Nicaea, they have held many Councils themselves, and have published a faith in each of them, and have stood to none, nay, they will never do otherwise, for perversely seeking, they will never find that Wisdom which they hate. I have accordingly subjoined portions both of Arius’s writings and of whatever else I could collect, of 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 without blushing.
Quote ID: 8829
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 12
Section: 3C1
15. Arius and those with him thought and professed thus: God made the Son out of nothing, and called Him His Son;’ The 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.’
Quote ID: 8830
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 12/13
Section: 3C1
Blasphemies of Arius.….
And Ingenerate we call Him, because of Him who is generate by nature. We praise Him as without beginning because of Him who has a beginning. And adore Him as everlasting, because of Him who in time has come to be. The Unbegun made the Son a beginning of things originated; and advanced Him as a Son to Himself by adoption.
….
Wise is God, for He is the teacher of Wisdom.
….
Understand that the Monad was; but the Dyad was not, before it was in existence. It follows at once that, though the Son was not, the Father was God.
….
Wisdom existed as Wisdom by the will of the Wise God.
….
At God’s will the Son is what and whatsoever He is.
Quote ID: 8831
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 13/14
Section: 3C1
16. And what they wrote by letter to the blessed Alexander, the Bishop, runs as follows:--To our Blessed Pope and Bishop, Alexander, the Presbyters and Deacons send health in the Lord.
Our faith from our forefathers, which also we have learned from thee, Blessed Pope, is this:--We acknowledge One God, alone Ingenerate, alone Everlasting, alone Unbegun, alone True, alone having Immortality, alone Wise, alone Good, alone Sovereign; Judge, Governor, and Providence of all, unalterable and unchangeable, just and good, God of Law and Prophets and New Testament; who begat an Only-begotten Son before eternal times , through whom He has made both the ages and the universe;…
….
For the Father did not, in giving to Him the inheritance of all things, deprive Himself of what He has ingenerately in Himself; for He is the Fountain of all things.
….
For He is not eternal or co-eternal or co-unoriginate with the Father,….
Quote ID: 8832
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 14
Section: 3C1
This is a part of what Arius and his fellows vomited from their heretical hearts.….
And Eusebius of Nicomedia wrote over and above to Arius, to this effect, Since your sentiments are good, pray that all may adopt them; for it is plain to any one, that what has been made was not before its origination; but what came to be has a beginning of being.’ And Eusebius of Caesarea in Palestine, in a letter to Euphration the Bishop, did not scruple to say plainly that Christ was not true God.
Quote ID: 8833
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 15
Section: 3C1
And George who now is in Laodicea, and then was presbyter of Alexandria, and was staying at Antioch, wrote to Alexander the Bishop; Do not complain of Arius and his fellows, for saying, “Once the Son of God was not, “for Isaiah came to be son of Amos, and, whereas Amos was before Isaiah came to be, Isaiah was not before, but came to be afterwards.’ And he wrote to the Arians, Why complain of Alexander the Pope, saying, that the Son is from the Father? for you too need not fear to say that the Son was from God.’ For if the Apostle wrote (1 Cor. xi. 12), All things are from God,’ and it is plain that all things are made of nothing, though the Son too is a creature and one of the things made, still He may be said to be from God in that sense in which all things are said to be from God.’
Quote ID: 8834
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 15/16/17
Section: 3C1
And one Asterius from Cappadocia, a many-headed Sophist, one of the fellows of Eusebius,…….
19. These bold words against the Saviour did not content him, but he went further in his blasphemies, as follows:
The Son is one among others; for He is first of things originate, and one among intellectual natures; and as in things visible the sun is one among phenomena, and it shines upon the whole world according to the command of its Maker, so the Son, being one of the intellectual natures, also enlightens and shines upon all that are in the intellectual world.
And again he says, Once He was not, writing thus:--And before the Son’s origination, the Father had pre-existing knowledge how to generate; since a physician too, before he cured, had the science of curing.’ And he says again: The Son was created by God’s beneficent earnestness; and the Father made Him by the superabundance of His Power.’ And again: If the will of God has pervaded all the works in succession, certainly the Son too, being a work, has at His will come to be and been made.’ Now though Asterius was the only person to write this, Eusebius and his fellows felt the like in common with him.
Quote ID: 8835
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 17/22/23
Section: 3C1
21. Yet so it is, that they have convened successive Councils against that Ecumenical One, and are not yet tired.….
Thus they thought to hold Councils at their pleasure, as having those who concurred with them, whom they had ordained on purpose for this very object. Accordingly, they assemble at Jerusalem, and there they write thus:--
….
(2.) Nor may we, adopting the hazardous position, There was once when He was not,’ from unscriptural sources, imagine any interval of time before Him, but only the God who has generated Him apart from time; for through Him both times and ages came to be. Yet we must not consider the Son to be co-unbegun and co-ingenerate with the Father; for no one can be properly called Father or Son of one who is co-unbegun and co-ingenerate with Him. But we acknowledge that the Father who alone is Unbegun and Ingenerate, hath generated inconceivably and incomprehensibly to all: and that the Son hath been generated before ages, and in no wise to be ingenerate Himself like the Father, but to haFather who generated Him as His beginning; for the Head of Christ is God.’ (1 Cor. xi. 3.)
(3.) Nor again, in confessing three realities and three Persons, of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost according to the Scriptures, do we therefore make Gods three; since we acknowledge the Self-complete and Ingenerate and Unbegun and Invisible God to be one only, the God and Father (Joh. xx. 17)of the Only-begotten, who alone hath being from Himself, and alone vouchsafes this to all others bountifully.
(4.) Nor again, in saying that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is one only God, the only Ingenerate, do we therefore deny that Christ also is God before ages:….
*John’s note: These completely re-wrote their statement of faith several times, hoping to be accepted, even divorcing themselves from Arius’ famous declaration, “There was when He was not,” but it did not work.*
….
(6.) And those who say that the Father and Son and Holy Ghost are the same, and irreligiously take the Three names of one and the same Reality and Person, we justly proscribe from the Church,….
….
For we acknowledge that the Father who sent, remained in the peculiar state of His unchangeable Godhead, and that Christ who was sent fulfilled the economy of the Incarnation.
….
…we have a reverent belief in the Son’s words concerning Himself (Prov. viii. 22), The Lord created me a beginning of His ways for His works,’ we do not understand Him to have been originated like the creatures or works which through Him came to be.
Quote ID: 8836
Time Periods: ?
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia
Vita S. Antoni
Book ID: 446 Page: 31
Section: 3C1
And the number of their Councils, and the differences of their statements is a proof that those who were present at them, while at variance with the Nicene, are yet too feeble to harm the Truth.
Quote ID: 8837
Time Periods: ?
Councils: Council of Sirmium, 357, and The Blasphemy of Sirmium, The
https://jeltzz.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-council-of-sirmium-357-and.html
Book ID: 411 Page: 1
Section: 3C1
Insofar as some have been disturbed by ‘substantia’, which is termed οὐσία in Greek, that is (to be understood more precisely), ὁμοουσίον , or what is termed ὁμοιούσιον, no mention ought to be made of these whatsoever. And neither is anything to be said about them from the cause and rationale that they are not contained in the divine Scriptures, and that they are above the knowledge that pertains to humanity, nor is anyone able to explain the birth of the Son…
Quote ID: 8566
Time Periods: 4
Councils: Council of Sirmium, 357, and The Blasphemy of Sirmium, The
https://jeltzz.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-council-of-sirmium-357-and.html
Book ID: 411 Page: 1
Section: 3C1
There is no ambiguity, that the Father is greater. It is doubtful to none, that the Father in honour, dignity, splendor, majesty, and in the very name of Father, is greater than the Son, the Son himself testifying He that sent me is greater than I{18}, and that this is the catholic [dogma], no one is ignorant, that there are two persons of Father and Son, the Father greater, the Son subordinate with all those things which the Father has subordinated to him [i.e. to the Son].
Quote ID: 8567
Time Periods: 4
Councils: Council of Sirmium, 357, and The Blasphemy of Sirmium, The
https://jeltzz.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-council-of-sirmium-357-and.html
Book ID: 411 Page: 1
Section: 3C1
This is the conclusion and verification of the whole faith, that the Trinity is to be always preserved….
Quote ID: 8568
Time Periods: 4
Councils: First Council of Nicaea (Online Source)
From Wikipedia
Book ID: 89 Page: 3
Section: 3C1
Constantine had invited all 1800 bishops of the Christian church (about 1000 in the east and 800 in the west), but a smaller and unknown number attended. Eusebius of Caesarea counted 250, {21} Athanasius of Alexandria counted 318, {22} and Eustathius of Antioch estimated “about 270” {23} (all three were present at the council).
Quote ID: 2347
Time Periods: 4
Councils: First Council of Nicaea (Online Source)
From Wikipedia
Book ID: 89 Page: 5/6
Section: 3C1
Much of the debate hinged on the difference between being “born” or “created” and being “begotten”. Arians saw these as essentially the same; followers of Alexander did not. The exact meaning of many of the words used in the debates at Nicaea were still unclear to speakers of other languages. Greek words like “essence” (ousia), “substance” (hypostasis), “nature” (physis), “person” (prosopon) bore a variety of meanings drawn from pre-Christian philosophers, which could not but entail misunderstandings until they were cleared up. The word homoousia, in particular, was initially disliked by many bishops because of its associations with Gnostic heretics (who used it in their theology), and because their heresies had been condemned at the 264–268 Synods of Antioch.
Quote ID: 2348
Time Periods: 4
Councils: First Council of Nicaea (Online Source)
From Wikipedia
Book ID: 89 Page: 6
Section: 3C1
Position of Arius (Arianism)According to surviving accounts, the nontrinitarian Arius maintained that the Son of God was a Creature made from nothing, begotten directly of the Eternal God, and that he was God’s First Production, before all ages. And he argued that everything else was created through the Son. Thus, said the Arians, only the Son was directly created and begotten of God; and therefore there was a time that He had no existence. Arius believed that the Son of God was capable of His own free will of right and wrong, and that “were He in the truest sense a son, He must have come after the Father, therefore the time obviously was when He was not, and hence He was a finite being”,{44} and was under God the Father. Therefore Arius insisted that the Father’s divinity was greater than the Son’s. The Arians appealed to Scripture, quoting verses such as John 14:28: “the Father is greater than I”, and also Colossians 1:15: “Firstborn of all creation”.
Position of the council
The Council of Nicaea, with Arius depicted as defeated by the council, lying under the feet of Emperor Constantine.
Alexander and the Nicene fathers countered the Arians’ argument, saying that the Father’s fatherhood, like all of his attributes, is eternal. Thus, the Father was always a Father, and that the Son, therefore, always existed with him, co-equally and con-substantially. The Nicene fathers believed that to follow the Arian view destroyed the unity of the Godhead, and made the Son unequal to the Father. They insisted that such a view was in contravention of such Scriptures as “I and the Father are one” and “the Word was God”, as such verses were interpreted. (John 10:30 John 1:1) With Athanasius, they declared that the Son had no beginning, but had an “eternal derivation” from the Father, and therefore was co-eternal with him, and equal to God in all aspects.
Quote ID: 2349
Time Periods: 4
Councils: First Council of Nicaea (Online Source)
From Wikipedia
Book ID: 89 Page: 8
Section: 3C1
In spite of his sympathy for Arius, Eusebius of Caesarea adhered to the decisions of the council, accepting the entire creed.
Quote ID: 2350
Time Periods: 4
Councils: First Council of Nicaea (Online Source)
From Wikipedia
Book ID: 89 Page: 11
Section: 3C1
In the short-term, however, the council did not completely solve the problems it was convened to discuss and a period of conflict and upheaval continued for some time. Constantine himself was succeeded by two Arian Emperors in the Eastern Empire: his son, Constantius II and Valens. Valens could not resolve the outstanding ecclesiastical issues, and unsuccessfully confronted St. Basil over the Nicene Creed.{61}
Quote ID: 2352
Time Periods: 4
Councils: First Council of Nicaea (Online Source)
From Wikipedia
Book ID: 89 Page: 11
Section: 3C1
Almost immediately, Eusebius of Nicomedia, an Arian bishop and cousin to Constantine I, used his influence at court to sway Constantine’s favor from the orthodox Nicene bishops to the Arians.{62}Eustathius of Antioch was deposed and exiled in 330. Athanasius, who had succeeded Alexander as Bishop of Alexandria, was deposed by the First Synod of Tyre in 335 and Marcellus of Ancyra followed him in 336. Arius himself returned to Constantinople to be readmitted into the Church, but died shortly before he could be received. Constantine died the next year, after finally receiving baptism from Arian Bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia, and “with his passing the first round in the battle after the Council of Nicaea was ended”.{62}
Quote ID: 2353
Time Periods: 4
Councils: First Council of Nicaea (Online Source)
From Wikipedia
Book ID: 89 Page: 11/12
Section: 3C1
While Constantine had sought a unified church after the council, he did not force the Homoousian view of Christ’s nature on the council (see The role of Constantine).Constantine did not commission any Bibles at the council itself. He did commission fifty Bibles in 331 for use in the churches of Constantinople, itself still a new city. No historical evidence points to involvement on his part in selecting or omitting books for inclusion in commissioned Bibles.
Despite Constantine’s sympathetic interest in the Church, he did not actually undergo the rite of baptism himself until some 11 or 12 years after the council.
For more details on this topic, see Constantine I’s turn against Paganism.
Quote ID: 2355
Time Periods: 4
Councils: Seven Ecumenical Councils, NPNF2 Vol. 14, The Seven Ecumenical Councils
Philip Schaff, Editor.
Book ID: 677 Page: 185
Section: 2D3A,3C1
“But Eunomians, who are baptized with only one immersion, and Montanists, who are here called Phrygians, and Sabellians, who teach the identity of Father and Son, and do sundry other mischievous things, and [the partisans of] all other heresies—for there are many such here, particularly among those who come from the country of the Galatians:—all these, when they desire to turn to orthodoxy, we receive as heathen.”PJ footnote reference: Canons of the One Hundred and Fifty Fathers who assembled at Constantinople, Canon VII.
Quote ID: 9717
Time Periods: 24
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire - Vol. 2, The
Edward Gibbon
Book ID: 210 Page: 324
Section: 3C1
On the same day which had been fixed for the triumph of Arius, he expired; and the strange and horrid circumstances of his death might excite a suspicion that the orthodox saints had contributed more efficaciously than by their prayers to deliver the church from the most formidable of her enemies.{3}
Quote ID: 8558
Time Periods: 4
Documents of the Christian Church
Edited by Henry Bettenson & Chris Maunder
Book ID: 74 Page: 32
Section: 2B1,3C1
A “conservative” like Juvenal, who professedly execrates all foreign superstitions, might at first sight appear to be devoted in every fibre to the national religion; and reading the delightful opening of satire XII, one might well imagine that he still loved it profoundly. He paints with charming freshness the preparations for one of the sacrifices to the Triad of the Capitol: {83} . . . .PJ: Three in one.
Quote ID: 2059
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 6
Section: 3C1
His existence was fully and uncompromisingly dependent upon the totally free will of the Creator.The derivative character of the Son’s existence was indicated to the Arians by a number of Gospel passages which emphasized the “received” character of the Son’s authority and function. Thus Jesus’ ἑξουσία is his not by nature but by gift of the Father (Matt. 28:18); his role as judge has the same derivative character (John 5:22). In a similar vein the Arians observed that all things are given (δέδωκεν) into the Son’s hand for believing on him (John 3:35). Continuing to select those texts whose verbs and meaning were in the δίδωμι and παραδίδωμι family, the Arians cited also Matt. 11:27 and John 6:37 and concluded from all these texts . . .
If he was, as you say, Son according to nature (κατὰ φύσιν), he had no need to receive (λαβείν), but he possessed (εἶχε) [these things] according to nature as a Son. {29}
For the Arians the creaturely character of Jesus portrayed in the Gospels even meant that he stood in need of God’s empowering Holy Spirit. Therefore, they seemed to have insisted that the Son, as other persons, received the Spirit for empowerment in his life of obedience to the Father.
Quote ID: 2090
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 26
Section: 3C1
The Arians appear to have described the unity of the Son with the Father as an agreement (συμφωνία, σύμφωνος) with God, an agreement in the sense of harmony with him rather than identity; and this is the way they explain John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.”For they say “since what the Father wills (θέλει), these things the Son also wills (θέλει), and is contrary neither in thoughts (νοήμασιν) nor in judgments, but is in all respects concordant (σύμφωνος) with him, declaring doctrines which are the same and a word consistent and united with the Father’s teaching, therefore it is that he and the Father are one [John 10:30]”; and some of them have dared to write as well as say this. {47}
Quote ID: 2091
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 49
Section: 3C1
The Arians did not, as Athanasius’ own discussion reveals, baptize in the name of the Father alone, nor did they reserve the use of the word “God” to the Father alone. {27} As we have shown in the opening chapter, Arian Christians spoke of an advancing, not a demoted, Son. They understood the divinity of the Son differently from the orthodox.. . . .
Apart from objection to particular understandings and conceptualizations of fatherhood and sonship, we have no substantial evidence of Arian reticence to revere and honor the Son.
Quote ID: 2092
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 50
Section: 3C1
The foundation of Arius’ Christianity is both implicit and explicit in the declaration that the Son is creature, one among the beings made and sustained by the will of God. {32}
Quote ID: 2093
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 53
Section: 3C1
Nowhere does Arius, Eusebius, or Asterius suggest that the Son’s beginning was marked by the birth (or baptism) of Jesus of Nazareth. According to them, the one called “Word” and “Son” was created before all ages.
Quote ID: 2094
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 65
Section: 3C1
The persistent accusations of the Alexandrian episcopate are best ignored: Arians neither organized a conspiracy against the divinity of the Christian savior nor did they work to diminish his centrality in the consciousness and action of people within the church. Far from it.Pastor John notes: John’s note: hard to believe they thought such
Quote ID: 2095
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 77
Section: 3C1
If there has been broad scholarly agreement about the centrality of the doctrine of God and cosmological concerns in Arian circles, however, sharp disagreements have surfaced as soon as attempts are made to place Arius and his companions in particular philosophical and ecclesiastical traditions. The question of the origins of Arian Christianity was not long ago declared to be “wide open.” {3}
Quote ID: 2098
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 79
Section: 3C1
A bewildering array of precursors have been postulated for Arian doctrine by modern scholarship: Aristotle, Plato (and Platonists like Atticus and Albinus), Philo, Origen, Lucian, Paul of Samosata, and the exegetes of the “schools” in Alexandria and Antioch. {9}
Quote ID: 2099
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 81
Section: 3C1
One of Arius’ major objections to the theology voiced by the bishop of Alexandria turned on its uses of such phrases as “always a Father, always a Son.”. . . .
Asserting that their own reading of scripture disallowed this doctrine, Arian spokesmen scored their opponents for teaching two unbegotten first principles (δύο ἀγέννητα), strongly suggesting that they believed Alexander’s formulas traceable to emanationist ideas of the Gnostics and the modalist theology of the Sabellians. {14}
Pastor John notes: John’s note: ‘first principles’= beings
Quote ID: 2100
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 82/83
Section: 3C1
…the Son has subsisted by will and pleasure before times and ages. And before he was begotten or made or appointed or formed, he was not.. . .the Son has a beginning, but God is without beginning.
. . . .
. . .[the Son] did not exist before being begotten…being begotten apart from time before all things.
The Unbegun made (ἔθηκε) the Son a beginning (ἀρχήν) of the creatures (τῶν γενητῶν).
. . .the monad was, but the dyad (δυάς) was not before it came to be.
There was when the Son of God was not, and he was begotten later who previously did not exist.
The Word of God was not forever, but he came to be from the nonexistent (ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων). For God, who is, made (πεποίηκε) him who was not out of the nonexistent.
The Son was not always; for all things were made from the nonexistent, and all existing creatures and works were made, so also the Word of God himself was made from the nonexistent, and there was when he did not exist, and he was not before he was made, but he also had a beginning of creation. {19}
Quote ID: 2101
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 83
Section: 3C1
Arius’ Thalia contains the statement that “…when the Son does not exist, the Father is God,” and he writes, similarly, to Eusebius that “God precedes in existence the Son.” {21} Arius’ meaning is unambiguous: prior to the Son’s creation, God is God, not Father. Thus one must say that God, rather than the Father, precedes the Son in existence. Arians objected to the sempiternity not of God but of God as Father. This was clearly recognized by Alexander, whose encyclical epistle preserves the Arian teaching that “God was not always (a) Father, but there was when God was not (a) Father.” {22}In Arian usage, the term “Father” signifies a relationship which God has to the Son, not an attribute which he has in himself. This is attested by the care with which Arius distinguishes between God and Father. God only receives the name Father, he argues, upon the creation of the Son.
Quote ID: 2102
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 83
Section: 3C1
When the orthodox insisted that if the Son is not eternal we creatures should be called the Son’s sons, the Arians retorted, not entirely tongue in cheek, that by the reckoning of their opponents, Christ should be called God’s brother, not his Son. {24}Pastor John notes: John’s note: of course; ha!
Quote ID: 2103
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 88/89
Section: 3C1
Rehearsing the faith which he received from his forebears (and which he claims to have learned from his antagonist Alexander, to whom he writes), Arius asserts, “We confess one God, alone unbegotten, alone eternal, alone unbegun, alone true, alone having immortality, alone wise, alone good, alone sovereign, judge, orderer and governor of all, unchanging and unalterable, just and good, God of the law and prophets and the New Testament…” {47}. . . .
When Arius speaks of God as “alone true” (μόνον ἀληθινόν), he echoes the prayer of Jesus in John 17:3 (τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν θεόν). The phrase “alone wise” (μόνον σοφόν) corresponds with doxological language of Rom. 16:27 (μόνῳ σοφῳ θεῳ), and reference to the Deity as “alone good” evokes the statement by Jesus in Mark 10:18 (οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ θεός). The remaining two phrases containing μόνον are taken from an eschatological passage in 1 Timothy, …
[footnote 7] Arius Ep. ad Alex. (Opitz3, Urk. 6.2, p. 12, lines 4-7.)
Quote ID: 2104
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 90/91
Section: 3C1
Consider on its own terms and in the light of its own evident sources, Arius’ statement about God and his attributes does not compel the interpretation frequently given to it. It distinguishes in unambiguous language the sovereign God from the uniquely begotten Son, who subsists by the Father’s will, is preeminent among creatures, and as perfect creature shares immutability with his Maker. Of a purposeful depreciation, demotion, or assault upon the honor and status of the Son there is no real evidence—at least no more than can be found in 1 Tim. 2:5.Pastor John notes: John’s note: not necessarily; they were forced
Quote ID: 2105
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 91
Section: 3C1
The cardinal principle of the Arians, as we remarked earlier, applies with equal force to the Jesus of history and to the preexistent Son. It is that all creatures, including the Son and redeemer, are ultimately and radically dependent upon a Creator whose sole means of relating to his creation is by his will (βούλησις) and pleasure (θέλησις). {55} The derivative character of the power and authority manifest in Jesus’ ministry was traced by Arian exegetes from a series of biblical texts which spoke of the things bestowed upon him by his Father. These assertions are in complete harmony with what is claimed about the Son created before all ages—both the mode of his origination and his role in God’s purposes for the cosmos.
Quote ID: 2106
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 92
Section: 3C1
“Unless,” the Arians maintain, “he the Son has by will come to be, then God had a Son by necessity and against his good pleasure.” {57}[footnote 57] Athanasius Or. c. Ar. 3.62 (Bright, p. 215).
Quote ID: 2107
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 96
Section: 3C1
The third, and for the Arians the all-important, point is already intimated in the reference to God’s creation of “a certain one.” It is stated in provocative language in the Thalia: The Unbegun made (or instituted—ἔθηκε) the Son as a beginning (or office of power/sovereignty—ἀρχήν) of the other things made (τῶν γενητῶν) and raised (ἤνεγκεν) him for a Son to himself, adopting him (τεκνοποιήσας). {73}
Quote ID: 2108
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 101
Section: 3C1
Eusebius reminds Paulinus of others called “begotten” in scripture; they too were called into relationship with God by his will, and they no less than the Son, their fellow creature, may demonstrate obedience to him by their “disposition” and “power.”
Quote ID: 2109
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 102
Section: 3C1
The bishop Athanasius is at his rhetorical best in these jousting with Arian pronouncements, which he quotes selectively, connects together as his agenda of ridicule dictates, and (not infrequently) pushes to conclusions which we may be sure the Arians themselves would have disowned. It is argument by misrepresentation, …Pastor John notes: John’s note: the text actually reads ‘The bishop’ and Athanasius was circled earlier in the text as a note as to which bishop the text is referring to here
Quote ID: 2110
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 115
Section: 3C1
No ambiguity whatever surrounds Asterius’ conception of the Son’s identity as student:He is a creature and belongs to the things made. But he has learned (μεμαθήκε) to frame (δημιουργεῖν) as if at the side of a teacher and artisan (παρὰ διδασκάλου καὶ τεχνίτου), and thus he rendered service (ὑπηρέτησε) to the God who taught (διδάξαντι) him. {158}
The Son depends upon the Father for training whereby he will fashion the cosmos. It is learning which is acquired rather than natural, and the Arians presumably had no difficulty in thinking of increase in the Son’s expertise.
Quote ID: 2111
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 116
Section: 3C1
The basis of the attack is Athanasius’ conviction that a creature is incapable of creating another creature since none of the things brought to be is an efficient cause. {163} The retort of the Arians is most provocative. They say,Behold, through Moses [God] led the people out of Egypt, and through him he gave the law, and yet he was man—so that it is possible for the like (τὰ ὅμοια) to be brought into being (γίνεσθαι) through the like (διὰ τοῦ ὁμοίου). {164}
Arians liken the creative activity of the Son to the work of Moses, the one under divine orders.
Quote ID: 2112
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 117
Section: 3C1
So the designations of him as slave (δοῦλος), servant (διάκονος), minister (ὑπηρέτης), and the like are pointed declarations of their vision of the way in which the two persons are related: {167}. . .what the Father wills, the Son wills also, and does not oppose either the purposes or judgments of the Father. Rather, he is in all respects in accord (ἐν πᾶσιν ἐστι σύμφωνος) with him, declaring the very same doctrines and a word consistent and united with the Father’s teaching (διδασκαλιᾳ). It is in this way that he and the Father are one (cf. John 10:30). {168}
[footnote 168] Arterius, frg. XIV (Bardy, Lucien, p. 346). Vide Origen c. Cels, 8.12; Theodore Mopsuestia fr. in Jo. 5.19 (Migne PG 66 744B). The symbol of Antioch in 341 spoke of “three in hypostasis, but one in accord,” and the idea of συμφωνία figured at the Council of Sardica, as we learn from Theodoret (H.E. 2.8.45). Athanasius comments on John 10:30 and 14:9 in De Syn. 48: “Now as to its [i.e., the union] consisting in agreement of doctrines, and in the Son’s not disagreeing with the Father, as the Arians say, such an interpretation is a sorry one, for both the saints, and still more angels and archangels have such an agreement with God, and there is no disagreement among them” (NPNF translation). Asterius’ endorsement of this kind of moral union between Father and Son is attested also in frg. XXXII (Bardy, Lucien, p. 352), and in fragments 73 and 74 of Marcellus (GCS 4, pp. 198-200).
Quote ID: 2113
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 141
Section: 3C1
After it is revealed to Antony that his death is imminent (he is, Athanasius reports, nearly 105), the revered monk delivers two farewell discourses. The speeches can be understood to function in the treatise as reiterations of the main lessons to be learned from the desert hero’s career. To the monks gathered in the outer mountain he encourages endurance in askēsis, reminding them “to live as though dying daily.” Finally, they are to have nothing to do with the Meletian schismatics, nor are they to have communion with the Arians, whose current favor with judges and whose fantasizing posture (φαντασία) will soon come to an end. {48} Identical advice is communicated to the two monks (Palladius gives their names as Macarius and Amatas) who attended the aged Antony in the inner mountain: the discipline is to be kept as if they were making a new beginning in the pursuit of virtue. Antony’s parting words again sound the alarm: “Let there be no fellowship between you and the schismatics, and have nothing at all to do with the heretical Arians. You know how I avoided them because of their Christ-battling and heterodox teaching.” {49} To Athanasius and Serapion, orthodox bishops, and to the two monks he bequeaths his few possessions and dies (it is related) with his feet in the air, as if in preparation for a journey from the earth. {50} The conclusion of the Life serves to underscore the point that Antony was the dedicated and persistent ally of those locked in conflict with the Arians. And if the alliance has some basis in fact, it is presented here not merely as report but in the undisguised form of propaganda. Apparently the political climate at the time of the work’s composition demanded it. The monks, for whom the work is primarily written, and the pagans who may read it are to be left in no doubt that Antony, “the man of God,” was under divine direction when his opposition to demonic forces compelled him to join the battle against the Arian blasphemy.
Quote ID: 2114
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 153
Section: 3C1
. . .Athanasius makes no significant departure as he recounts the virtuous deeds of Antony, making him both a spokesman for orthodoxy and the model for sanctification according to the dynamic of orthodox soteriology. The great monk defends the eternity and full deity of the Logos whose descending grace works both his miracles and his own perfection.A carefully fashioned polemical weapon, the Antony presented by Athanasius stands as a sharp alternative to the Arian scheme of salvation and its attendant idea of discipleship. As symbol of ascetic greatness, the desert hero becomes also the vehicle for orthodoxy’s campaign to undo threatening (perhaps successful) Arian bids for monastic support.
Quote ID: 2115
Time Periods: 4
Early Arianism: A View of Salvation
Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh
Book ID: 76 Page: 169
Section: 3C1
That the pagan as well as the Christian tradition allowed a progress in virtue which led one to deification and unchangeability has already been noted. {47} Contemporary pagan, like Christian, theology was ready to note that the deification one achieved by being brought to the divine state through virtue was based on a similarity of virtue between God and creatures and not on a change of natures. {48}The radical step taken by the Arians was in extending that kind of deity to the redeemer. In this, as we have seen, the Arians were aided and abetted by certain motifs in the Bible. Yet certain pagan traditions may be operative here also. The Pythagorean Sthenidas wrote an interesting passage in his Own Royalty in which he distinguished between the first God who is king, “by nature and essence” (φύσει καὶ [Ỡσίᾳ]) and the king (on earth) who is king “by birth and imitation” (γενέσει καὶ μιμάσει). {49} A king is wise (σοφόν) only as an imitator (ἀντίμιμος) and emulator (ζηλωτός) of the first God. The God who rules all possessed wisdom in himself (ἐν αὐτῳ κεκταμένος τὰν [sic] σοφίαν), whereas the king who exists in time has knowledge (ὁ δ᾽ ἐν χρόνῳ ἐπιστάμαν). {50}
Quote ID: 2116
Time Periods: 4
Early Christian Church, The
J.G. Davies
Book ID: 214 Page: 138
Section: 3C1
The bishop of Alexandria was charged with separating the Father and the Son, with denying the latter’s eternity, with failing to describe him as homoousios (of one substance) with the Father, and with stating that he was a creature.
Quote ID: 5296
Time Periods: 4
Early Christian Church, The
J.G. Davies
Book ID: 214 Page: 142
Section: 2B1,3C1
(Origen) So he declared that the Son is transcended by the Father in as great a degree as he himself transcends the best of all other beings. He could even call the Word a creature, in applying to him the Wisdom text of Prov. Viii.22: ‘God created me in the beginning of his ways.’
Quote ID: 5298
Time Periods: 4
Early Christian Church, The
J.G. Davies
Book ID: 214 Page: 163
Section: 3C1
The pressure of these contemporary circumstances therefore led to a changed conception of Church-State relations which found its clearest expression in a letter of Hosius of Cordova to Constantius when he was ordered to communicate with the Arians in 355:
Quote ID: 5315
Time Periods: 4
Early Christian Church, The
J.G. Davies
Book ID: 214 Page: 167
Section: 3C1
Already in 363-5 Basil had issued Against Eunomius, in which the consubstantiality of the three divine persons is maintained, . . .
Quote ID: 5319
Time Periods: 4
Early Christian Church, The
J.G. Davies
Book ID: 214 Page: 176
Section: 2B1,3C1
Donatism was indeed a running sore in the side of the African Church, but it was confined to one area. Arianism set the whole of the empire afire, disrupting the Church’s life at all levels.
Quote ID: 5323
Time Periods: 234
Early Christian Church, The
J.G. Davies
Book ID: 214 Page: 182
Section: 3C1
Then in May 381 the second Ecumenical Council met in Constantinople and adopted a statement of faith, the ‘Nicene’ Creed, anathematized all heresies, and condemned Sabellianism, Eunomianism and Pneumatomachianism. The work of the council was furthered by other gatherings at Aquileia and Rome. Arianism was now crushed and its surviving adherents, split into rival groups, formed only obscure and powerless sects. It was only among the nations beyond the frontiers that it continued to exercise any influence.
Quote ID: 5324
Time Periods: 4
Early Christian Church, The
J.G. Davies
Book ID: 214 Page: 194
Section: 3C1
The only priority of the Father is a logical, not a temporal one since the Son and the Spirit derive from him as their source; but this priority involves no superiority. ‘The doctrine of the Trinity, as formulated by the Cappadocians, may be summed up in the phrase that God is one object in himself and three objects to himself. Further than that illuminating paradox it is difficult to see that human thought can go. It secures both the unity and the trinity.’ G. L. Prestige book God Patristic Thought 1936 pg 49Eudoxius: ‘we believe. . .in one. . .Lord. . ..who was made flesh but not man. For he did not take a human soul...He was not two natures. . .
Quote ID: 5325
Time Periods: 4
Early Christian Church, The
J.G. Davies
Book ID: 214 Page: 194
Section: 3C1
According to Athanasius, the Word ‘prepared in the Virgin the body as a temple for himself, and personally appropriates this as an instrument, being made known in it and dwelling in it’; he was ‘born and appeared in a human body’.
Quote ID: 5326
Time Periods: 4
Early Christian Church, The
J.G. Davies
Book ID: 214 Page: 199
Section: 3C1
The overthrow of Arianism made possible the promulgation of a formula that could be universally accepted and this was the ‘Nicene’ Creed approved and issued by the Council of Constantinople in 381. More theological than the baptismal creeds, this statement is the only one which the Church as a whole has ever received.
Quote ID: 5327
Time Periods: 4
Early Christian Church, The
J.G. Davies
Book ID: 214 Page: 251
Section: 3C1
. . .the property of the Father is to beget, that of the Son, to be begotten and that of the Spirit to proceed. This was not independent speculation nor was it completely identical with the eastern belief, as Ambrose’s pupil, Augustine, fully realized: ‘for the sake of speaking of things ineffable, that in some way we may be able to express what we are in no way able to express fully, our Greek friends have spoken of one essence and three substances, but the Latins of one essence or substance and three persons’. Either position is legitimate for ‘the transcendence of the Godhead surpasses the power of ordinary speech’.
Quote ID: 5359
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, Sozomen
Sozomen
Book ID: 86 Page: 36
Section: 3C1
He fell into absurd discourses, so that he had the audacity to preach in the church what no one before him had ever suggested; namely, that the Son of God was made out of that which had no prior existence, that there was a period of time in which he existed not; that, as possessing free will he was capable of vice and virtue, and that he was created and made: to these, many other similar assertions were added as he went forward into the arguments and the details of inquiry.
Quote ID: 2317
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, Sozomen
Sozomen
Book ID: 86 Page: 36
Section: 3C1
Arius, however, would not be persuaded to compliance, and many of the bishops and clergy considered his statement of doctrine to be correct. Alexander, therefore, ejected him and the clergy who concurred with him in sentiment from the church. Those of the parish of Alexandria, who had embraced his opinions, were the presbyters Aithalas, Achillas, Carpones, Sarmates, and Arius, and the deacons Euzoius, Macarius, Julius, Menas, and Hellandius. Many of the people, likewise, sided with them:
Quote ID: 2318
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, Sozomen
Sozomen
Book ID: 86 Page: 37
Section: 3C1
Such being the state of affairs at Alexandria, the partisans of Arius, deeming it prudent to seek the favor of the bishops of other cities, sent legations to them;….
When Alexander perceived that many who were revered by the appearance of good conduct, and weighty by the persuasiveness of eloquence, held with the party of Arius, and particularly Eusebius, president of the church of Nicomedia, a man of considerable learning and held in high repute at the palace; he wrote to the bishops of every church desiring them not to hold communion with them.
Quote ID: 2319
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, Sozomen
Sozomen
Book ID: 86 Page: 39
Section: 3C1
Constantine convened a synod at Nicaea, in Bithynia, and wrote to the most eminent men of the churches in every country, directing them to be there on an appointed day.….
And as was usually the case on such occasions, many priests resorted to the council for the purpose of transacting their own private affairs; for they considered this a favorable opportunity for rectifying their grievances, and in what points each found fault with the rest, he presented a document to the emperor, wherein he noted the offenses committed against himself. As this course was pursued day after day, the emperor set apart one certain day on which all complaints were to be brought before him.
Quote ID: 2320
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, Sozomen
Sozomen
Book ID: 86 Page: 43
Section: 3C1
At the commencement of the conference there were but seventeen who praised the opinion of Arius, but eventually the majority of these yielded assent to the general view, To this judgment the emperor likewise deferred, for he regarded the unanimity of the conference to be a divine approbation; and he ordained that any one who should be rebellious thereto, should forthwith be sent into banishment, as guilty of endeavoring to overthrow the Divine definitions.
Quote ID: 2321
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, Sozomen
Sozomen
Book ID: 86 Page: 44
Section: 3C1
The emperor punished Arius with exile, and dispatched edicts to the bishops and people of every country, denouncing him and his adherents as ungodly, and commanding that their books should be destroyed, in order that no remembrance of him or of the doctrine which he had broached might remain. Whoever should be found secreting his writings and who should not bum them immediately on the accusation, should undergo the penalty of death, and suffer capital punishment. The emperor wrote letters to every city against Arius and those who had received his doctrines, and commanded Eusebius an Theognis to quit the cities whereof they were bishops; he addressed himself in particular to the church of Nicomedia, urging it to adhere to the faith which had been set forth by the council, to elect orthodox bishops, to obey them, and to let the past fall into oblivion; and he threatened with punishment those who should venture to speak well of the exiled bishops, or to adopt their sentiments.
Quote ID: 2322
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, The, Socrates Scholasticus
Socrates Scholasticus
Book ID: 217 Page: 7
Section: 3C1
Book I. Chapter I. Introduction to the WorkEUSEBIUS, surnamed Pamphilus, writing the History of the Church in ten books, closed it with that period of the emperor Constantine, when the persecution which Diocletian had begun against the Christians came to an end. Also in writing the life of Constantine, this same author has but slightly treated of matters regarding Arius, being more intent on the rhetorical finish of his composition and the praises of the emperor, than on an accurate statement of facts. Now, as we propose to write the details of what has taken place in the churches since his time to our own day, we begin with the narration of the particulars which he has left out, and we shall not be solicitous to display a parade of words, but to lay before the reader what we have been able to collect from documents, …
Quote ID: 5382
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, The, Socrates Scholasticus
Socrates Scholasticus
Book ID: 217 Page: 10
Section: 3C1
Chapter VI. Division begins in the Church from this Controversy; and Alexander Bishop of Alexandria excommunicates Arius and his Adherents.HAVING drawn this inference from his novel train of reasoning, he excited many to a consideration of the question; and thus from a little spark a large fire was kindled: for the evil which began in the Church at Alexandria, ran throughout all Egypt, Libya, and the upper Thebes, and at length diffused itself over the rest of the provinces and cities. Many others also adopted the opinion of Arius; ….
Quote ID: 5384
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, The, Socrates Scholasticus
Socrates Scholasticus
Book ID: 217 Page: 11/12
Section: 3C1
Chapter VI. Division begins in the Church from this Controversy; and Alexander Bishop of Alexandria excommunicates Arius and his Adherents.The dogmas they have invented and assert, contrary to the Scriptures, are these: That God was not always the Father, but that there was a period when he was not the Father; that the Word of God was not from eternity but was made out of nothing; for that the ever-existing God (‘the I AM’ -- the eternal One) made him who did not previously exist, out of nothing; wherefore there was a time when he did not exist, inasmuch as the Son is a creature and a work. That he is neither like the Father as it regards his essence, nor is by nature either the Fathers true Word, or true Wisdom, but indeed one of his works God, whereby God both made all things and him also. Wherefore he is as to his nature mutable and susceptible of change, as all other national creatures are: hence the Word is alien to and other than the essence of God; and the Father is inexplicable by the Son, and invisible to him, for neither does the Word perfectly and accurately know the Father, neither can he distinctly see him. The Son knows not the nature of his own essence: for he was made on our account, in order that God might create us by him, as by an instrument; nor would he ever have existed, unless God had wished to create us.
Quote ID: 5385
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, The, Socrates Scholasticus
Socrates Scholasticus
Book ID: 217 Page: 20
Section: 3C1
Chapter VIII. Of the Synod which was held at Nicoea in Bithynia, and the Creed there put forth.This creed was recognized and acquiesced in by three hundred and eighteen [bishops]; and being, as Eusebius says, unanimous is expression and sentiment, they subscribed it. Five only would not receive it, objecting to the term homoousios, ‘of the same essence,’ or consubstantial: these were Eusebius bishop of Nicomeda, Theognis of Nice, Maris of Chalcedon, Theonas of Marmarica, and Secundus of Ptolemais. “For,” said they “since that is consubstantial which is from another either by partition, derivation or germination; by germination, as a shoot from the roots; by derivation as children from their parents; by division, as two or three vessels of gold from a mass, and the Son is from the Father by none of these modes: therefore they declared themselves unable to assent to this creed.”
Quote ID: 5386
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, The, Socrates Scholasticus
Socrates Scholasticus
Book ID: 217 Page: 23
Section: 3C1
Chapter VIII. Of the Synod which was held at Nicoea in Bithynia, and the Creed there put forth.Accordingly, since no divinely inspired Scripture contains the expressions, “of things which do not exist,” and “there was a time when he was not,” and such other phrases as are therein subjoined, it seemed unwarrantable to utter and teach them: and moreover this decision received our sanction the rather from the consideration that we have never heretofore been accustomed to employ these terms.
. . . .
Such was the letter addressed by Eusebius Pamphilus to the Christians at Caesarea in Pales-time.
Quote ID: 5387
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, The, Socrates Scholasticus
Socrates Scholasticus
Book ID: 217 Page: 23
Section: 3C1
Accordingly, since no divinely inspired Scripture contains the expressions, “of things which do not exist,” and “there was a time when he was not,” and such other phrases as are therein subjoined, it seemed unwarrantable to utter and teach them: and moreover this decision received our sanction the rather from the consideration that we have never heretofore been accustomed to employ these terms.….
Such was the letter addressed by Eusebius Pamphilus to the Christians at Caesarea in Pales-time.
Quote ID: 9042
Time Periods: ?
Ecclesiastical History, The, Socrates Scholasticus
Socrates Scholasticus
Book ID: 217 Page: 23/24
Section: 3C1
CHAPTER IXThe letter of the Synod, relative to its Decisions: and the Condemnation of Arius and those who agreed with him.
….
In the first place, then, the impiety and guilt of Arius and his adherents were examined into, in the presence of our most religions emperor Constantine: and it was unanimously derided that his impious opinion should be anathematized, with all the blasphemous expressions he has uttered, in affirming that ‘the Son of God sprang from nothing,’ and that ‘there was a time when he was not’; saying moreover that ‘the Son of God, because possessed of free will, was capable either of vice or virtue; and calling him a creature and a work. All these sentiments the Holy Synod has anathematized, having scarcely patience to endure the hearing of such an impious opinion, or, rather, madness, and such blasphemous words.
Quote ID: 9043
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, The, Socrates Scholasticus
Socrates Scholasticus
Book ID: 217 Page: 25/26
Section: 3C1
Constantine Augustus, to the Catholic church of the Alexandrians. Beloved brethren, hail! We have received from Divine Providence the inestimable blessing of being relieved from all error, and united in the …….
Arius alone beguiled by the subtlety of the devil was discovered to be the sole disseminator of this mischief, first among you, and afterward with unhallowed purposes among others also. Let us therefore embrace that doctrine which the Almighty has presented to us: let us return to our beloved brethren from whom an irreverent servant of the devil has separated us: let us go with all speed to the common body and our own natural members.
Quote ID: 9045
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, The, Socrates Scholasticus
Socrates Scholasticus
Book ID: 217 Page: 50/51
Section: 3C1
Chapter XXV. Of the Presbyter who exerted himself for the Recall of Arius.Victor Constantine Maximus Augustus, to Arius.
It was intimated to your reverence some time since, that you might come to my court, in order to obtain an interview with us. We are not a little surprised that you did not do this immediately. Wherefore having at once mounted a public vehicle, hasten to arrive at our court; that when you have experienced our clemency and regard for you, you may return to your own country. May God protect you, beloved. Dated the twenty-fifth of November.
. . . .
The emperor accordingly admitted them to his presence, and asked them whether they would agree to the creed. And when they readily gave their assent, he ordered them to deliver to him a written statement of their faith.
. . . .
Chapter XXXVI. Arius, on being recalled, presents a Recantation the Emperor, and pretends to accept the Nicene Creed. THEY having drawn up a declaration to the following effect, presented it to the emperor.
‘Arius and Euzoius, to our Most Religious and Pious Lord, the Emperor Constantine.’
‘In accordance with the command of your devout piety, sovereign lord, we declare our faith, and before God profess in writing, that we and our adherents believe as follows: …’
. . . .
Chapter XXVII. Arius having returned to Alexandria with the Emperor’s Consent, and not being received by Athanasius, the Partisans of Eusebius bring Many Charges against Athanasius before the Emperor.
ARIUS having thus satisfied the emperor, returned to Alexandria. But his artifice for suppressing the truth did not succeed; for on his arrival at Alexandria, as Athanasius would not receive him, but turned away from him as a pest, he attempted to excite a fresh commotion in that city by disseminating his heresy. Then indeed both Eusebius himself wrote, and prevailed on the emperor also to write, in order that Arius and his partisans might be readmitted into the church. Athanasius nevertheless wholly refused to receive them, and wrote to inform the emperor in reply, that it was impossible for those who had once rejected the faith, and had been anathematized, to be again received into communion on their return. But the emperor, provoked at this answer, menaced Athanasius in these terms: …..
Quote ID: 5392
Time Periods: 4
Ecclesiastical History, The, Socrates Scholasticus
Socrates Scholasticus
Book ID: 217 Page: 58
Section: 3C1
Chapter XXXIV. The Emperor summons the Synod to himself by Letter, in order that the Charges against Athanasius might be carefully examined before him. VICTOR CONSTANTINE MAXIMUS AUGUSTUS, to the bishops convened at Tyre.It is in consequences of the acts of my religious service towards God that peace is everywhere reigning; and that the name of God is sincerely had in reverence even among the barbarians themselves, who until now were ignorant of the truth. Now it is evident that he who knows not the truth, does not have a true knowledge of God also: yet, as I before said even the barbarians on my account, who am a genuine servant of God, have acknowledged and learned to worship him, whom they have perceived in very deed protecting and caring for me everywhere. So that from dread of us chiefly, they have been thus brought to the knowledge of the true God whom they now worship.
Pastor John’s note: Constantine’s 30th year as emperor.
Online source: www.sacred-texts.com/cla/toj/toj04.htm
Quote ID: 5393
Time Periods: 4
Europe and the Faith
Hilaire Belloc
Book ID: 84 Page: 88/89
Section: 3C1
The Emperor’s Court did indeed at last—after many variations—abandon it, but a tradition survived till long after (and in many places) that Arianism stood for the “wealthy” and “respectable” in life.. . . .
It was the one great quarrel and problem of the time.
No one troubled about race, but everybody was at white heat upon the final form of the Church.
The populace felt it in their bones that if Arianism conquered, Europe was lost: for Arianism lacked vision.
. . . .
Had Arianism triumphed, the aged Society of Europe would have perished.
Quote ID: 2263
Time Periods: ?
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History Books, LCL 153: Eusebius I, Books 1-5
Eusebius
Book ID: 141 Page: 13
Section: 3C1
Book I chapter II. . . the living Logos who was, in the beginning, God by the side of the Father, the first and only offspring of God, before all creation and fabrication {2}. . . .
Quote ID: 3073
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History Books, LCL 153: Eusebius I, Books 1-5
Eusebius
Book ID: 141 Page: 19
Section: 3C1
Book I chapter IIAnd that there really is a certain being living and existent before the world, who ministered to the Father and God of the universe for the fabrication of all created things, called the Logos and Wisdom of God, can be learned from the actual person of Wisdom herself, in addition to the proofs, for in one place she tells her own secret very clearly through Solomon.
. . . .
And to this she adds, “The Lord created me as the beginning of his ways for his works; he established me before the world; in the beginning, before the making of the earth, before the springs of water came forth . . .
Quote ID: 3074
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 82
Section: 3C1
This, too, the great Moses teaches, when, as the most ancient of all the prophets, he describes under the influence of the divine Spirit the creation and arrangement of the universe. He declares that the maker of the world and the creator of all things yielded to Christ himself, and to none other than his own clearly divine and first-born Word, the making of inferior things, and communed with him respecting the creation of man. “For,” says he, “God our likeness.”
Pastor John’s footnote reference: Eusebius, Church History, I.ii.
Quote ID: 9518
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 515
Section: 3C1,3C2
How Controversies originated at Alexandria through Matters relating to Arius.
In this manner the emperor, like a powerful herald of God, addressed himself by his own letter to all the provinces, at the same time warning his subjects against superstitious{2} error,
[Footnote 2] ”Demoniacal.” 1709 renders “diabolical.”
Pastor John’s footnote reference: Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxi.
Quote ID: 9573
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 516
Section: 3C1
Keeping these objects in view, I sought to accomplish the one by thought, which is hidden from the eye, while the other I tried to rectify by the power of military authority. For I was aware that, if I should succeed in establishing, according to my hopes, a common harmony of sentiment among all the servants of God, the general course of affairs would also experience a change corresponding to the pious desires of all.
Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxv.
Note: This was a letter from Constantine to Alexander and Arius.
Quote ID: 9575
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 516
Section: 3C1
You, through whose aid I had hoped to procure a remedy for the errors of others, are in a state which needs healing even more than theirs. And yet, now that I have made a careful enquiry into the origin and foundation of these differences, I have found the cause to be of a truly insignificant character, and quite unworthy of such fierce contention.
Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxviii.
Quote ID: 9576
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 516
Section: 3C1
How can I help but to expect a far easier and more speedy resolution of this difference, when the cause which hinders general harmony of sentiment is intrinsically trifling and of little importance?
Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxviii.
Quote ID: 9577
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 516
Section: 3C1
I understand that the origin of the present controversy is this. When you, Alexander, demanded of the priests what opinion they each maintained respecting a certain passage in Scripture, or rather, I should say, that you asked them something connected with an unprofitable question. You then, Arius, inconsiderately insisted on what ought never to have been speculated about at all,…
Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxix.
Quote ID: 9578
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 517
Section: 3C1
“Now, therefore, do ye both exhibit an equal degree of forbearance, and receive the advice which your fellow-servant righteously gives. What then is this advice? It was wrong in the first instance to propose such questions as these, or to reply to them when propounded. For those points of discussion which are enjoined by the authority of no law, but rather suggested by the contentious spirit which is fostered by misused leisure, even though they may be intended merely as an intellectual exercise, ought certainly to be confined to the region of our own thoughts, and not hastily produced in the popular assemblies, nor unadvisedly entrusted to the general ear.”
Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxix.
Quote ID: 9579
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 517
Section: 3C1
“It is incumbent therefore on us in these cases to be sparing of our words, lest, in case we ourselves are unable, through the feebleness of our natural faculties, to give a clear explanation of the subject before us, or, on the other hand, in case the slowness of our hearers’ understandings disables them from arriving at an accurate apprehension of what we say, from one or other of these causes the people be reduced to the alternative either of blasphemy or schism.”
Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxix.
Quote ID: 9580
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 517
Section: 3C1
“Let therefore both the unguarded question and the inconsiderate answer receive your mutual forgiveness. For the cause of your difference has not been any of the leading doctrines or precepts of the Divine law, nor has any new heresy respecting the worship of God arisen among you. You are in truth of one and the same judgment: you may therefore well join in communion and fellowship.”
Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxx.
Quote ID: 9581
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 517
Section: 3C1
“For as long as you continue to contend about these small and very insignificant questions, it is not fitting that so large a portion of God’s people should be under the direction of your judgment, since you are thus divided between yourselves. I believe it indeed to be not merely unbecoming, but positively evil, that such should be the case.”
Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxxi.
Quote ID: 9582
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 517
Section: 3C1
“But let us still more thoughtfully and with closer attention examine what I have said, and see whether it be right that, on the ground of some trifling and foolish verbal difference between ourselves, brethren should assume towards each other the attitude of enemies, and the august meeting of the Synod be rent by profane disunion, because of you who wrangle together on points so trivial and altogether unessential?”
Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxxi.
Quote ID: 9583
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 517
Section: 3C1
“And this I say without in any way desiring to force you to entire unity of judgment in regard to this truly idle question, whatever its real nature may be.”
Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxxi.
Quote ID: 9584
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 518
Section: 3C1
“For while the people of God, whose fellow-servant I am, are thus divided amongst themselves by an unreasonable and pernicious spirit of contention, how is it possible that I shall be able to maintain tranquillity of mind?”
Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, II.lxxii.
Quote ID: 9585
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 522
Section: 3C1
When the appointed day arrived on which the council met for the final solution of the questions in dispute, each member was present for this in the central building of the palace . . . . And now, all rising at the signal which indicated the emperor’s entrance, at last he himself proceeded through the midst of the assembly, like some heavenly messenger of God, clothed in raiment which glittered as it were with rays of light, reflecting the glowing radiance of a purple robe, and adorned with the brilliant splendor of gold and precious stones. Such was the external appearance of his person; and with regard to his mind, it was evident that he was distinguished by piety and godly fear. This was indicated by his downcast eyes, the blush on his countenance, and his gait. For the rest of his personal excellencies, he surpassed all present in height of stature and beauty of form, as well as in majestic dignity of mien, and invincible strength and vigor.
Pastor John’s footnote reference: Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, III.x.
Quote ID: 9587
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 525
Section: 3C1
Exhortation to obey the Decrees of the Council.
“Receive, then, with all willingness this truly Divine injunction, and regard it as in truth the gift of God. For whatever is determined in the holy assemblies of the bishops is to be regarded as indicative of the Divine will.
Pastor John’s footnote reference: Eusebius, The Life of Constantine the Great, III.xx.
Quote ID: 9590
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 1, Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 668 Page: 538
Section: 3C1
The Emperor’s Letter to Eusebius praising him for refusing the Bishopric of Antioch.
The Emperor’s Letter to me on my refusing the Bishopric of Antioch.
VICTOR CONSTANTINUS, MAXIMUS AUGUSTUS, to Eusebius.
“I have most carefully perused your letter, and perceive that you have strictly conformed to the rule enjoined by the discipline of the Church. Now to abide by that which appears with apostolical tradition, is a proof of true piety.”
Pastor John’s footnote reference: Eusebius, The Life of Constantine the Great, III.lxi.
Quote ID: 9597
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 3, Theodoret, Jerome, Gennadius, & Rufinus: Historical Writings
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 669 Page: 50–51
Section: 3C1
Moreover, the condemnation of the assertion that before He was begotten He was not, did not appear to involve any incongruity, because all assent to the fact that He was the Son of God before He was begotten according to the flesh. And here our emperor, most beloved by God, began to reason concerning His divine origin, and His existence before all ages. He was virtually in the Father without generation, even before He was actually begotten, the Father having always been the Father, just as He has always been a King and a Saviour, and, virtually, all things, and has never known any change of being or action.
PJ footnote: Council of Nicea, XI, “Letter of Eusebius of Cæsarea to the people of his Diocese”, NPNF2, Vol. 3.
Pg.? -3C1/4-
Additionally, it did not seem out of place to condemn the statement “Before he was begotten he did not exist,” because everyone confesses that the Son of God existed before he was begotten according to the flesh. At this point in the discussion, our most pious Emperor maintained that the Son existed before all ages even according to his divinely inspired begetting, since even before the act of begetting was performed, in potentiality he was with the Father, even before he was begotten by him, since the Father is always Father, just as he is always King and always Savior; he has the potentiality to be all things, and remains exactly the same forever.
Translation from NPNF2 vol. 2, pp. 12-3, adapted by AJW
Other translations in A New Eusebius, no. 292 and NPNF2 vol. 3, p.46-7
Quote ID: 9620
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 4, Athanasius: Select Works and Letters
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 670 Page: 75
Section: 3C1
“On their dictating this formula, we did not let it pass without inquiry in what sense they introduced “of the essence of the Father,” and “one in essence with the Father.” Accord- ingly questions and explanations took place, and the meaning of the words underwent the scrutiny of reason. And they professed, that the phrase “of the essence” was indicative of the Son’s being indeed from the Father, yet without being as if a part of Him. And with this understanding we thought good to assent to the sense of such religious doctrine, teaching, as it did, that the Son was from the Father, not however a part of His essence. On this account we assented to the sense ourselves, without declining even the term ‘One in essence,’ peace being the object which we set before us, and stedfastness in the orthodox view.”
PJ footnote: Council of Nicea, 5, “Letter of Eusebius of Cæsarea to the people of his Diocese”, NPNF2, Vol. 4.
Quote ID: 9622
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 4, Athanasius: Select Works and Letters
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 670 Page: 76
Section: 3C1
So much then be said concerning the faith which was published; to which all of us assented, not without inquiry, but according to the specified senses, mentioned before the most religious Emperor himself, and justified by the forementioned considerations. And as to the anathematism published by them at the end of the Faith, it did not pain us, because it forbade to use words not in Scripture, from which almost all the confusion and disorder of the Church have come. Since then no divinely inspired Scripture has used the phrases, “out of nothing,” and “once He was not,” and the rest which follow, there appeared no ground for using or teaching them; to which also we assented as a good decision, since it had not been our custom hitherto to use these terms.
PJ footnote: Council of Nicea, 8, “Letter of Eusebius of Cæsarea to the people of his Diocese”, NPNF2, Vol. 4.
Quote ID: 9623
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius, NPNF2 Vol. 4, Athanasius: Select Works and Letters
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 670 Page: 74–75
Section: 3C1
On this faith being publicly put forth by us, no room for contradiction appeared; but our most pious Emperor, before any one else, testified that it comprised most orthodox statements. He confessed moreover that such were his own sentiments, and he advised all present to agree to it, and to subscribe its articles and to assent to them, with the insertion of the single word, One-in-essence, which moreover he interpreted as not in the sense of the affections of bodies, nor as if the Son subsisted from the Father in the way of division, or any severance; for that the immaterial, and intellectual, and incorporeal nature could not be the subject of any corporeal affection, but that it became us to conceive of such things in a divine and ineffable manner.
PJ footnote: Council of Nicea, 4, “Letter of Eusebius of Cæsarea to the people of his Diocese”, NPNF2, Vol. 4.
Quote ID: 9621
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius: Life of Constantine by Averil Cameron and Stuart Hall
Translated by Averil and Stuart Hall
Book ID: 394 Page: 116
Section: 3C1
64 Victor Constantinus Maximus Augustus to Alexander and Arius.
Quote ID: 8546
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius: Life of Constantine by Averil Cameron and Stuart Hall
Translated by Averil and Stuart Hall
Book ID: 394 Page: 117
Section: 3C1
As I considered the origin and occasion for these things, the cause was exposed as extremely trivial and quite unworthy of so much controversy.
Quote ID: 8547
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius: Life of Constantine by Averil Cameron and Stuart Hall
Translated by Averil and Stuart Hall
Book ID: 394 Page: 117
Section: 3C1
69 I understand then that the first stages of the present dispute were as follows. When you, Alexander, demanded of the presbyters what view each of them took about a certain passage from what is written in the Law–or rather about some futile point of dispute–you, Arius, thoughtlessly replied…….
Accordingly, let each of you extend pardon equally, and accept what your fellow-servant in justice urges upon you. It is this. It was neither right to ask about such things in the first place, nor to answer when asked.
….
For how great is any individual that he can either correctly discern or adequately explain the meaning of matters so great and so exceedingly difficult? And even supposing someone manages this easily, how many of the people is he likely to convince? Or who could sustain precise statements in such disputes without risk of dangerous mistakes? We must therefore avoid being talkative in such matters….
Quote ID: 8548
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius: Life of Constantine by Averil Cameron and Stuart Hall
Translated by Averil and Stuart Hall
Book ID: 394 Page: 118
Section: 3C1
That so many of God’s people, who ought to be subject to the direction of your minds, are at variance because you are quarrelling with each other about small and quite minute points, is deemed to be neither fitting nor in any way legitimate.
Quote ID: 8549
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius: Life of Constantine by Averil Cameron and Stuart Hall
Translated by Averil and Stuart Hall
Book ID: 394 Page: 118
Section: 3C1
Let us reconsider what was said with more thought and greater understanding, to see whether it is right that, through a few futile verbal quarrels between you, brothers are set against brothers and the honourable synod divided in ungodly variance through us, when we quarrel with each other over such small and utterly unimportant matters. These things are vulgar and more befitting childish follies than suitable to the intelligence of priests and informed men. Let us consciously avoid all devilish temptations.
Quote ID: 8550
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius: Life of Constantine by Averil Cameron and Stuart Hall
Translated by Averil and Stuart Hall
Book ID: 394 Page: 118
Section: 3C1
…this very silly question….
Quote ID: 8551
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius: Life of Constantine by Averil Cameron and Stuart Hall
Translated by Averil and Stuart Hall
Book ID: 394 Page: 119
Section: 3C1
…tiny matter….
Quote ID: 8552
Time Periods: 4
Eusebius: Life of Constantine by Averil Cameron and Stuart Hall
Translated by Averil and Stuart Hall
Book ID: 394 Page: 120
Section: 3C1
This then was the effect of jealous Envy and a malignant demon resenting the prosperity of the churches.
Quote ID: 8553
Time Periods: 4
Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians, The
Peter Heather
Book ID: 223 Page: 76
Section: 3C1
This commentary includes a letter written by Auxentius of Durostorum, which, together with the Codex Argenteus, illuminates the extraordinary achievements of one of Athanaric’s humblest subjects: Ulfilas, the Little Wolf of the Goths. {33}Born at the beginning of the fourth century, Ulfilas was the offspring of Roman prisoners living among the Tervingi.
Quote ID: 5544
Time Periods: 4
Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians, The
Peter Heather
Book ID: 223 Page: 78
Section: 3C1
Constantius went to the Danube and greeted Ulfilas ‘as if he were Moses himself’. {34}
Quote ID: 5545
Time Periods: 4
Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians, The
Peter Heather
Book ID: 223 Page: 79
Section: 3C1
Into this arena, sometime after 348, strode Ulfilas. Auxentius’ letter contains the statement of belief that Ulfilas left as his last will and testament, and succinctly explains the reasoning behind it.
Quote ID: 5546
Time Periods: 4
Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians, The
Peter Heather
Book ID: 223 Page: 79
Section: 3C1
Ulfilas was one of the more traditional Christians: he found the Nicene definition unacceptable because it contradicted the scriptural evidence and seemed to leave little room for distinguishing God the Father from God the Son. In Auxentius’ account:In accordance with tradition and the authority of the Divine Scriptures, [Ulfilas] never concealed that this God [the Son] is in second place and the originator of all things from the Father and after the Father and on account of the Father and for the glory of the Father ...holding as greater [than himself] God his own Father [John 14:28] - this he always made clear according to the Holy Gospel.
Quote ID: 5547
Time Periods: 4
Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians, The
Peter Heather
Book ID: 223 Page: 79
Section: 3C1
Unfortunately, the tractates and commentaries haven’t survived. Ulfilas ended up on the losing side of doctrinal debate and his works, like those of so many of his party, were not preserved.
Quote ID: 5548
Time Periods: 4
Final Pagan Generation, The
Edward J. Watts
Book ID: 384 Page: 154/155
Section: 3C1
In the Life, Athanasius claims a personal relationship with Antony, who had come to be seen as solitary monasticism’s founder, and uses this to show Antony’s endorsement of Athanasius’s theological orthodoxy and institutional authority.{37} The Life structurally mimics earlier philosophical biographies in order to argue that the Christian ascetic pursuits of Antony represent a practical philosophy that surpassed both traditional Hellenic philosophy and, by implication, the Platonically tinged theology of Arius.{38}
Quote ID: 8320
Time Periods: 4
Formation of Christendom, The
Judith Herrin
Book ID: 225 Page: 56
Section: 3C1
footnote Nicean counsel did not issue any recording of its proceedings. We must depend upon Eusebius and Athanasius for info.
Quote ID: 5644
Time Periods: 4
Formation of Christendom, The
Judith Herrin
Book ID: 225 Page: 99
Section: 3C1
matters of importance at the Nicean council: Arius and the date of Easter. Council called by Constantine, protected by Roman soldiers.
Quote ID: 5670
Time Periods: 4
Gods and the One God
Robert M. Grant
Book ID: 426 Page: 161
Section: 3C1
We are persecuted because we say, The Son has a beginning but god is without beginning.” The bishop of Nicomedia agreed with him. “It is obvious to anyone that what has been made was not before coming into existence. What comes into existence has a beginning of being.” The slogan of Arius and his allies soon came to be this: “There was when he was not.”
Quote ID: 8684
Time Periods: 4
Heresies of the High Middle Ages
Walter L. Wakefield and Austin P. Evans, Trans.
Book ID: 104 Page: 175/177
Section: 3C1,2D3B,3D1
A SUMMA AGAINST HERETICS Chapter V: on the Passagians, Who Say That Christ Is a Created Being….
3. Also, in the same book: “Drop down dew, ye heavens, from above and let the clouds reign the just; let the earth be opened and bud forth a savior. I the Lord have created him.” {17}…
4. Also, Solomon, in Proverbs, speaking in the character of Wisdom, says: “The Lord created me in the beginning of his ways”; and in another version, “The Lord created me the beginning of his ways,” or following another reading, “the beginning of his works.” {18}
15. Also, in Isaiah, “I the Lord, this is my name; I will not give my glory to another.” {32} But his glory is that He himself is omnipotent God. Therefore, He will not give it to another, hence, not to the Son. Therefore, the Son is not omnipotent….
….
18. Also, the Son is from the Father, therefore He comes after the Father. An example: Heat is from fire; therefore it follows after fire.
Quote ID: 2585
Time Periods: 7
Inheritance of Rome, The
Chris Wickham
Book ID: 236 Page: 172
Section: 3C1
The Arian-Catholic division lasted until 589 in Spain…
Quote ID: 5917
Time Periods: 456
Irenaeus, ANF Vol. 1, The Apostolic Fathers
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 671 Page: 351/352
Section: 2B1,3C1
Cerinthus, again, a man who was educated in the wisdom of the Egyptians, taught that the world was not made by the primary God, but by a certain Power far separated from him, and at a distance from that Principality who is supreme over the universe. . . .
PJ footnote: Irenaeus, Against Heresies, I.xxvi.1.
Quote ID: 9626
Time Periods: 2
Irenaeus, ANF Vol. 1, The Apostolic Fathers
Edited by Philip Schaff
Book ID: 671 Page: 351/352
Section: 2A1,3C1
Moreover, after his baptism, Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler, and that then he proclaimed the unknown Father, and performed miracles.
PJ footnote: Irenaeus, Against Heresies, I.xxvi.1.
Quote ID: 9627
Time Periods: 2
Julian: Two Orations of the Emperor Julian
Emperor Julian
Book ID: 218 Page: 12
Section: 3C1
Gods. And the Corybantes {1}, who are the three ruling hypostases of the more excellent genera after the gods, were placed round him by the mother of the gods as his guards.
Quote ID: 5400
Time Periods: 4
Julian’s Against the Galileans
R. Joseph Hoffmann
Book ID: 123 Page: 165
Section: 3C1
Valens was the last official patron of the dying Arian cause, ….
Quote ID: 2853
Time Periods: 4
Later Roman Empire, The
Averil Cameron
Book ID: 243 Page: 84
Section: 3C1
The Vandals, who conquered parts of northern Africa (at least that much) were Arian Xns.
Quote ID: 6140
Time Periods: 456
Mary Through the Centuries
Jaroslav Pelikan
Book ID: 148 Page: 48
Section: 3C1
The most important intellectual struggle of the first five centuries of Christian history- indeed the most important intellectual struggle in all of Christian history- took place in response to the question of whether the divine in Jesus Christ was identical with God the Creator.
Quote ID: 3204
Time Periods: 4
Mary Through the Centuries
Jaroslav Pelikan
Book ID: 148 Page: 62
Section: 3C1
The Arian heresy, in the words of Henry Gwatkin, “degraded the Lord of Saints to the level of his creatures.” What it ascribed to Christ was more than it was willing to ascribe to any of the saints but less than it ascribed to the supreme Deity.Pastor John notes: John’s Note: Amen!
Quote ID: 3209
Time Periods: 4
Mary Through the Centuries
Jaroslav Pelikan
Book ID: 148 Page: 63
Section: 3C1
According to the letter of the Arians to Alexander of Alexandria, the Logos was “a perfect creature of God, but not as one of the creatures,” since he was the creature through whom God had made all the other creatures; therefore the “superiority” of this creature over all the other creatures was that he had been created directly whereas they had been created through him.Pastor John notes: John’s Note: Amen
Quote ID: 3210
Time Periods: 4
Mary Through the Centuries
Jaroslav Pelikan
Book ID: 148 Page: 64
Section: 2D2,3C1
What we have seen so far in the Mariology of Athanasius would seem to indicate that, in a sense quite different from that implied by Harnack, “what the Arians had taught about Christ, the orthodox now taught about Mary,” so that these creaturely predicates did not belong to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, but to the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God.
Quote ID: 3211
Time Periods: 34567
Paganism to Christianity in the Roman Empire
Walter Woodburn Hyde
Book ID: 172 Page: 205
Section: 3C1
Athanasius, through his eloquence and the favor of the Emperor, won, the Arians were banished as heretics, and the Nicene creed, based on the baptismal one of Caesarea in Palestine, was presented by Eusebius and signed by all present except five bishops who objected to the word homoousios.
Quote ID: 3796
Time Periods: 4
Paganism to Christianity in the Roman Empire
Walter Woodburn Hyde
Book ID: 172 Page: 212
Section: 3C1
Whatever its origin it was accepted as “the perfect expression of orthodoxy” by the Greek, Roman, and heretical churches of the East - Syrian Jacobite, Chaldean Nestorian, Egyptian Coptic, and others. Its essential paragraph runs:I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father before all worlds [God of God,], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made....And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father [and the Son]; who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified...and I believe in one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.....{75}
Quote ID: 3799
Time Periods: ?
Paganism to Christianity in the Roman Empire
Walter Woodburn Hyde
Book ID: 172 Page: 213
Section: 3C1
As to the value of the idea of the Trinity to the Church, opinions will always vary. While a recent writer calls:One divine nature representing itself simultaneously in three persons...each fully God, and yet...not three natures, not three Gods, but one nature and one God, a perfect meaningless paradox,{78}
Quote ID: 3800
Time Periods: ?
Paganism to Christianity in the Roman Empire
Walter Woodburn Hyde
Book ID: 172 Page: 214
Section: 3C1
At the Council of Constantinople, Arian bishops were exiled as they had been at Nicaea which now meant the “official” death but not the extinction of Arianism in the Empire. Most of the Germanic tribes above the Lower Danube, already converted by Ulfilas (Gothic Wulfila), “Little Wolf” bishop of the Visigoths (341-383), {83} remained Arian Christian for another century and a half.
Quote ID: 3801
Time Periods: 4
Part of an Edict Against Arius and His Followers
Athanasius of Alexandria
Book ID: 175 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
(2.) In addition, if any writing composed by Arius should be found, it should be handed over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated, but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by Arius, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offense, he shall be submitted for capital punishment.(Online Source: Fourth Century Christianity Home)Athanasius of Alexandria
Quote ID: 3886
Time Periods: 4
Roman State and Christian Church: A Collection of Legal Documents to A.D. 535, Vol. 1
67 ReScript of Constantine I on Arianism, p. 187 Translation from Coleman-Norton, P.R., Roman State and Christian Church,
Book ID: 81 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
(16.) Quite fittingly the Devil has subverted you by his own wickedness; and perhaps this seems pleasant to certain persons (for thus you have persuaded yourself). But it is in every way a destructive evil. (17.) Come now, having departed from your occupation with absurdities, listen, good Arius, for I discourse with you.
Quote ID: 2165
Time Periods: 4
Rome and the Barbarians (100 B.C. – A.D. 400)
Thomas S. Burns
Book ID: 190 Page: 365
Section: 3A4C,3C1
The barbarians were not all the same and never had been, but because in literature and imperial propaganda they will served the same singular purpose—to be humbled before the power of the emperor—they were still portrayed as one people, thirsting after Roman blood and booty just as in all the centuries past. A slight crack in the monolithic portrait of barbarians occurred when Christian authors emphasized Alaric’s decision to grant Christians asylum in churches while his men sacked Rome in 410, but even this incident is actually just a transition from pagan stereotypes to Christian ones. Barbarian Christians were all seen as devoted Arian heretics, and as such they stood somewhere between pagan barbarism and full Christian piety. The same cultural dichotomy that had inspired Julius Caesar was being rewritten for a Christian empire. Arians were now supposed to occupy the middle position where the Celts of Gaul had once stood.
Quote ID: 4220
Time Periods: 56
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 3
Section: 3C1
In the year 318 {1} Arius, a presbyter in charge of the church and district of Baucalis in Alexandria, publicly criticized the Christological doctrine of his bishop, Alexander of Alexandria. Arius must have been born about 256 {2}, in Libya. We can be confident that Arius was Libyan in origin, not only because Epiphanius says so, {3} but because Arius himself in a letter written to the Emperor Constantine, which has not survived, claims that ‘the whole people of Libya’ were on his side, {4} and because it was the Libyan bishops, especially Secundus of Ptolemais, who supported the cause of Arius most persistently. {5}
Quote ID: 6744
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 5/6
Section: 3C1
As far as his own writings go, we have no more than three letters, a few fragments of another, and what purport to be fairly long quotations from the Thalia.
Quote ID: 6745
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 6
Section: 3C1
We are told that Arius wrote many other works, but no trace of them has survived, either quoted by his supporters or by his opponents. We do not even know the names of them.
Quote ID: 6746
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 6
Section: 3C1
He claims as his episcopal supporters not only his correspondent, Eusebius of Nicomedia, but also Eusebius of Caesarea.
Quote ID: 6747
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 10
Section: 3C1
When we attempt to reconstruct what appear to be quotations from the Thalia, Arius’ only known theological work, we meet the difficulty that they are all quotations made or reproduced by Athanasius, a fierce opponent of Arius who certainly would not have stopped short of misrepresenting what he said.
Quote ID: 6748
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 19
Section: 3C1
When Athanasius first began writing against the views of Arius, at the end of the fourth decade of the fourth century (Orationes con. Arianos 339/40), Arius had already been dead a few years (ob. 336).
Quote ID: 6749
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 27
Section: 3C1
The first name that occurs when we survey those of Arius’ contemporaries who supported him is that of Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia.….
The conventional picture of Eusebius is of an unscrupulous intriguer who was more interested in gaining and retaining power than in observing the rules of decent morality. This is of course because our knowledge of Eusebius derives almost entirely from the evidence of his bitter enemies.
Quote ID: 6750
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 31
Section: 3C1
Another sentence from a letter of Eusebius to Arius, quoted by Athanasius {48} simply reiterates one of the arguments of the letter to Paulinus:‘that which was made did not exist before coming into existence; that which has come into existence [Greek] has a beginning of being.’
Quote ID: 6751
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 32
Section: 3C1
The next contemporary of Arius who was his decided supporter to be examined is Asterius.….
The fragments of Asterius have been conveniently collected by Bardy; {51} they will be first:
Quote ID: 6752
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 33
Section: 3C1
Fragment IV (De Synodis 19)Before the production of the Son the father had a pre-existent [Greek] to produce, just as before a physician cures he has a capacity to heal.
Quote ID: 6753
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 34/35
Section: 3C1
Fragment XIII (Orationes con Arianos III. 10)Since what the Father wishes the Son also wishes and he (the Son) does not oppose him in either his ideas or his judgments, but is in everything harmonious [Greek] with him, and presents identity of doctrines and a consistent and exact correspondence with the Father’s teaching, for this reason he and the Father are one (John 10:30).
Fragment XV (Orationes con Arianos III.60)
This fragment is concerned to maintain that creation is not unworthy of God, nor is the will to create, and ‘let his superiority be postulated in the case of the first product’ [Greek, i.e. the Son].
Quote ID: 6754
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 37
Section: 3C1
Fragment XXXII {72}Asterius said that the Father and the Son are one and the same thing in that they agree [Greek] in everything. ‘I and the Father are one’ (John 10:30) refers to their exact agreement in all ideas and activities.
Quote ID: 6755
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 40/41
Section: 3C1
Arian doctrine cannot be accused of ignoring redemption, of concentrating on cosmology, on the relation of the pre-existent Son to the Father, at the expense of soteriology, of how we are saved. {73} On the contrary, it could be said that their doctrine took redemption more seriously than did that of their opponents, because it made proper allowance for the scandal of the Cross, for what Paul called ‘the weakness of God’ (1 Cor 1:22-25), for the involvement of the Godhead in the sufferings of Jesus Christ. This was a point which their opponents unanimously and consistently played down.
Quote ID: 6756
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 41
Section: 3C1
Another pronounced follower of Arius was Athanasius, bishop of Anazarbus (ecclesiastically the metropolitan see of (Eastern) Cilicia II and therefore not an obscure place.
Quote ID: 6757
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 42
Section: 3C1
Then Athanasius himself: “For the Son does not exalt himself against the Father, nor does he think that he is on equal terms with God (paria esse cum Deo); but he yields to his Father and confesses and teaches everybody that he the Father is greater than he.Pastor John notes: John’s note: #4
Quote ID: 6758
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 43
Section: 3C1
We have one brief fragment only of the work of another early supporter of Arius, Theognis, who was bishop of Nicaea at the time of the Council there, was exiled with Eusebius of Nicomedia.
Quote ID: 6759
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 43
Section: 3C1
‘Similarly too the Bithynian bishop Theognis writing to the Pope {83} says: “Therefore we call the Son originated (genetum), indeed an unoriginated Son could never be.
Quote ID: 6760
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 46
Section: 3C1
Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, was certainly an early supporter of Arius. He was claimed by Arius as a supporter; he wrote several letters on his behalf and attended at least one local synod which vindicated his views as orthodox and at another synod was censured and disciplined for refusing to condemn propositions ascribed to Arius.
Quote ID: 6761
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 48/49
Section: 3C1
In the Demonstratio the same drastic subordination and distinction of the Son appears. Moses, says Eusebius, calls Christ ‘sometimes God and Lord, sometimes the angel of God, establishing directly that this was not the supreme God, but a second, named God and Lord of Godfearing people, but messenger (angelos) of the supreme Father.’ {99} Most of the epiphanies of God in the Old Testament are of this second God. {100}
Quote ID: 6762
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 49
Section: 3C1
‘There is,’ says Eusebius, ‘a doctrine common to all men about the first and eternal and alone unoriginated Greek and supreme Cause of the universe, almighty ruler and sovereign, God…’ {101} This sole true unoriginated omnipotent God desired to create a rational creation and determined to make some ‘incorporeal, spiritual and divine powers’, and also human souls, who would possess free will, and proper places for them to live. For this purpose he thought it right that there should be ‘a single manager Greek and ruler of all Creation; and king of everything.’ {102} What the supreme God wills comes thereby into existence. It is wrong to think that God created anything out of nothing. His will is the material Greek for all created things. {103}Pastor John notes: John’s note: Philosophy!
Quote ID: 6763
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 50
Section: 3C1
But this does not prevent Eusebius from teaching quite explicitly one doctrine typical of Arianism at all stages of development, that the Son worships the Father as God.
Quote ID: 6764
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 52
Section: 3C1
On the whole however Eusebius’ favourite doctrine is that the Son is in effect the image of the Father’s substance Greek. {118} And on the subject of time, he dislikes using any language introducing the concept of time, but insists that the Father has existed before the Son and that the Son is not unoriginated, and has derived from the will and power of the Father. {119}
Quote ID: 6765
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 56
Section: 3C1
It is only by courtesy that Eusebius can be described as having a doctrine of the Trinity.
Quote ID: 6766
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 56/57
Section: 3C1
Let us begin with an extract from a letter which Eusebius wrote to Alexander of Alexandria about 320 protesting against his treatment of Arius and his followers. {140} In this letter Eusebius takes Alexander to task for unjustly accusing Arius and his friends of teaching that ‘the Son has come into existence from nonexistence like one of the mass’ Greek, whereas what they had actually said (in their letter quoted above, pp. 7-8) was that the Son was ‘a perfect creature, but not as one of the creatures.’ {141} He also defends the Arian group against Alexander’s accusation that they taught ‘he who is begot him who was not’ Greek’, on the grounds that this was a perfectly proper statement. If it is not allowed, ‘then there would be two Beings’ Greek’, {142} i.e. two grounds of being.
Quote ID: 6767
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 57
Section: 3C1
In a letter of Eusebius to Euphration bishop of Balanea (a town in Syria), written perhaps two years earlier at the very outset of the dispute. The Father and the Son, Eusebius argues here, cannot have co-existed eternally, but rather the father precedes the Son in eternal existence. If this were not so, then the Father would not be Father nor the Son Son, and both would be either unoriginated or originated.
Quote ID: 6768
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 57
Section: 3C1
There is, says Eusebius, the ‘one true God’ (Jn 17:3), and the Son who is God but not ‘the one true God’, who has nobody prior to him. The Son is ‘like the image of the true God’ and can be called ‘God’. {146} The image is not one and the same thing with the original, but ‘they are two substances Greek and two things and two powers’ (proof-text 1 Tim 2:5). {147}
Quote ID: 6769
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 58
Section: 3C1
At one point in the Ecclesiastical Theology he describes God as ‘incomprehensible, illimitable and unapproachable’ and the Son as in contrast ‘he who draws near to everybody.’ {151}Pastor John notes: John’s note: {151} Ecc. Theol. II.17.121
Quote ID: 6770
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 59
Section: 3C1
We cannot accordingly describe Eusebius as a formal Arian in the sense that he knew and accepted the full logic of Arius, or of Asterius’ position. But undoubtedly he approached it nearly.
Quote ID: 6771
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 123
Section: 3C1
It is true that Constantine at one time ordered his works to be burnt and his followers to be branded as ‘Porphyrians’. {116}Pastor John notes: John’s note: from Gelasius HE II.36.1
Quote ID: 6772
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 127/128
Section: 3C1
In the light of this evidence we cannot say that Arius was regarded by those who came after him as founding a school of theology. If anything, he was thought of as perpetuating the school of Lucian of Antioch. Arius was respected by later Arians, and some of his scanty literary works sometimes quoted. But he was not usually thought of as a great man by his followers. They would all have said that they were simply carrying on the teaching of the Bible and the tradition the Fathers.
Quote ID: 6773
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 137
Section: 3C1
Constantine at the end of 324 sent a Letter to Alexander and Arius, written in the usual blustering imperial style, urging them to be reconciled to each other, because they differed only over ‘a controversy of futile irrelevance”.
Quote ID: 6774
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 160
Section: 3C1
Eustathius of Antioch, in an extract given by Theodoret in his Church History, written within a very few years of the Council, between 325 and 330, {33} relates:….
‘the fanatical followers of Arius [Greek], afraid of being excommunicated by so great an assembled synod, were foremost in anathematizing the condemned doctrine, and attached their signatures to the agreed statements.’
Quote ID: 6775
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 164
Section: 3C1,3C2
It cannot be stated too often that the ancients did not suffer from the same passion for exact accuracy which modern scholarship displays.
Quote ID: 6776
Time Periods: 147
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 738
Section: 3C1
The scope of this work excludes a treatment of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit as it developed before the fourth century. {1}….
The early second-century concept of the Incarnation as the taking of a human body by the Holy Spirit had given way to a recognition of the separate existence of the Holy Spirit from the Son in the Apologists and even more clearly in Irenaeus and Tertullian, though the belief that God is spirit continued to trouble theologians in their efforts to create a consistent pneumatology.
Quote ID: 6777
Time Periods: 24
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 739
Section: 3C1
The doctrine of the Holy Spirit emerged into the fourth century as a minor concern of the church’s theologians. The surprising thing is, not that more attention was not paid to the Spirit, but that the theologians continued to include the Spirit in the framework of their theology.….
The continually practiced custom of baptizing into the Triple Name prevented the intellectuals from omitting the Holy Spirit altogether from their calculations.
Quote ID: 6778
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 740/741
Section: 3C1
The ideas on the Holy Spirit of Eusebius of Caesarea,…were themselves radical, if not positively eccentric.….
As far as this goes, the Spirit might still be described as God, but in his later Ecclesiastical Theology Eusebius excludes this possibility. After passages emphasizing the entire subordination of the Spirit to the Son, {9} he writes:
‘But the Spirit the Paraclete is neither God nor Son, since he has not received his origin (genesis) from the Father in the same way as the Son has, and is one of the things which have come into existence through the Son’. {10}
….
Earlier in the same work Eusebius had said that there were three entities believed in by the Church: the incarnate Son’s human nature: the Son of God inhabiting this having come forth [from the Father, Greek] and existing substantially, and God the Father of this Son. {11}There is no mention of the Spirit. This pneumatology of Eusebius is indeed extraordinary with no exact antecedent, but it is faithfully reproduced in every form of Arian doctrine thereafter.
Quote ID: 6779
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 749
Section: 2B1,3C1
Athanasius begins his argument for the divinity of the Holy Spirit from the point which was peculiarly his own, the existence of God as Trinity. The word ‘Trinity” Greek had long been in use (first by Theophilus of Antioch in the second half of the second century) and had been used to cover a multitude of conceptions.
Quote ID: 6780
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 749
Section: 3C1
Now, as Athanasius has abandoned the desire to see any mediating element within the Godhead nor any mediating supernatural instrument used to come between God and men, except the human nature of Jesus Christ, he cannot allow the createdness of the Holy Spirit.
Quote ID: 6781
Time Periods: 34
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 750
Section: 3C1
Next he has to meet the argument of the Tropici that if the Spirit proceeds from the Father then the Father has two Sons, and if he proceeds from the Father and the Son then he is the Father’s grandson.Pastor John’s note: Ha!
Quote ID: 6782
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 751
Section: 3C1
The Son is sent from the Father, the Son sends the Spirit, the Son glorifies the Father and the Spirit glorifies the Son; the Son declares what he has heard from the Father and the Spirit receives from the Son; the Son came in the name of the Father, and sends the Spirit in his own name. {61} Athanasius, in spite of some appearances, is not here speaking of the position of the Spirit within the Trinity. He never tries to determine this.
Quote ID: 6783
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 753
Section: 3C1
The disingenuous statement that the fathers of Nicaea had endorsed the doctrine of the Spirit’s deity is repeated in the Letter to the Bishops of Africa (369).When they wrote the words ‘and in the Holy Spirit’…
….
Owing to the work of Athanasius, then, the Eastern Church had been notified by at the latest 360 that the pro-Nicene cause involved defending not only the divinity of the Son, but also that of the Holy Spirit, and Athanasius had laid a foundation for a new theology of the Spirit which others were to continue and amplify.. {76}
Quote ID: 6784
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 755/756
Section: 3C1
The treatise on the Holy Spirit which we have in Jerome’s translation and which we can with confidence ascribe to Didymus the Blind… is not a full-blooded polemical work, but rather a considered treatise, in spite of meeting some of the arguments of the Macedonians. {89}….
Since therefore the holy Scripture does not say more about the Trinity, except that God is the Father of the Saviour and that the Son is begotten by the Father, we should believe no more than what is written’. {96}
This was one way of avoiding the difficulty which faced everybody who wrote at any length about the Holy Spirit in the second half of the fourth century, that of determining the place of the Spirit within the Trinity.
Quote ID: 6785
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 757
Section: 3C1
Part of a Decree made by a Roman council presided over by Damasus in 371 or 372 survives. {100} The Council was part of a campaign led by Damasus to drive Arianism out of the Western Church. It was only partly successful, because though this council could condemn Auxentius of Milan it was powerless to depose him.
Quote ID: 6786
Time Periods: 4
Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, The
R.P.C. Hanson
Book ID: 268 Page: 782
Section: 3C1
From this base Gregory launches into a fine expression of the gradualness of God’s revelation, borrowed largely from Origen, but here put to use to explain our gradual understanding of the Holy Spirit. The reason for this gradual unfolding was because, according to one of Gregory’s favourite principles, God would coerce nobody. He sketches an impressive scheme whereby God under the old dispensation gradually withdrew the supports upon which the Jews leaned in order to understand him, such as sacrifices, the Law, and circumcision, and then under the new dispensation he gradually added new revelations of himself: {238}
Quote ID: 6788
Time Periods: ?
Socrates Scholasticus, Church History, I.9. NPNF Series 2, Vol. 2
Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace
Book ID: 686 Page: 34/35
Section: 2D3A,3C1
Arius’ Gruesome Death“It was then Saturday, and Arius was expecting to assemble with the church on the day following: but divine retribution overtook his daring criminalities. For going out of the imperial palace, attended by a crowd of Eusebian partisans like guards, he paraded proudly through the midst of the city, attracting the notice of all the people. As he approached the place called Constantine’s Forum, where the column of porphyry is erected, a terror arising from the remorse of conscience seized Arius, and with the terror a violent relaxation of the bowels: he therefore enquired whether there was a convenient place near, and being directed to the back of Constantine’s Forum, he hastened thither. Soon after a faintness came over him, and together with the evacuations his bowels protruded, followed by a copious hemorrhage, and the descent of the smaller intestines: moreover portions of his spleen and liver were brought off in the effusion of blood, so that he almost immediately died.”
Quote ID: 9779
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 1/2
Section: 3C1
We unanimously decided that his impious opinion should be anathematized, with all the blasphemous expressions he has uttered, namely that “the Son of God came to be out of nothing,” that “there was a time when he was not,” and even that “the Son of God, because he possessed free will, was capable of either both evil and good.” They also call him a creature (ktisma) and a work (poiēma). The holy Council has anathematized all these ideas, barely able to endure it as we listened to such impious opinions (or rather madnesses) and such blasphemous words. - Socrates, Church History NPNF2 Vol. 2
Quote ID: 9749
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
(1.) I call God to witness, as is fitting, who is the helper of my endeavors and the preserver of all men, that I had a twofold reason for undertaking this duty which I have now performed. My design then was first to bring the various beliefs formed by all nations about God to a condition of settled uniformity.
NPNF2 VOL. 1, pp. 515-8 - Belongs with Eusebius -
----
Keeping these objects in view, I sought to accomplish the one by thought, which is hidden from the eye, while the other I tried to rectify by the power of military authority. For I was aware that, if I should succeed in establishing, according to my hopes, a common harmony of sentiment among all the servants of God, the general course of affairs would also experience a change corresponding to the pious desires of all. DELETE
Quote ID: 9751
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
You, through whose aid I had hoped to procure a remedy for the errors of others, are in a state which needs healing even more than theirs. And yet, now that I have made a careful enquiry into the origin and foundation of these differences, I have found the cause to be of a truly insignificant character, and quite unworthy of such fierce contention. DELETE
Quote ID: 9752
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
How can I help but to expect a far easier and more speedy resolution of this difference, when the cause which hinders general harmony of sentiment is intrinsically trifling and of little importance? DELETE
Quote ID: 9753
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
(6.) I understand that the origin of the present controversy is this. When you, Alexander, demanded of the priests what opinion they each maintained respecting a certain passage in Scripture, or rather, I should say, that you asked them something connected with an unprofitable question. You then, Arius, inconsiderately insisted on what ought never to have been speculated about at all,...DELETE
Quote ID: 9754
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 2
Section: 3C1
(7.) And so I now ask you both to show an equal degree of consideration for the other, and to receive the advice which your fellow-servant impartially gives. What then is this advice? It was wrong in the first instance to propose such questions as these, and also wrong to reply to them when they were presented. (8.) For those points of discussion are not commanded by the authority of any law, but are rather the product of an argumentative spirit which is encouraged by the idle useless talk of leisure.
Quote ID: 9755
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 3
Section: 3C1
We ourselves may be unable, through the weakness of our natural abilities, to give a clear explanation of the subject before us, or, on the other hand, our hearers understanding may prevent them from arriving at an accurate understanding of what we say. Lest that be the case, it is our obligation to be sparing with our words, so that neither of these situations will cause the people to be reduced either to blasphemy or to schism.
Quote ID: 9756
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 3
Section: 3C1
(9.) Now forgive one another for both the careless question and the ill-considered answer. The cause of your difference has not been any of the leading doctrines or precepts of the Divine law, nor has any new heresy respecting the worship of God arisen among you. You are really of one and the same judgment; and so it is fitting for you to join in communion and fellowship. (10.) As long as you continue to contend about these small and very insignificant questions, it is not fitting that so large a portion of God’s people should be under the direction of your judgment, since you are thus divided between yourselves. In my opinion, it is not merely unbecoming, but positively evil, that such should be the case.
Quote ID: 9757
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 3
Section: 3C1
Let us still more thoughtfully and with closer attention examine what I have said, and see whether it be right: On the ground of some trifling and foolish verbal difference between ourselves, should brothers assume towards each other the attitude of enemies?
Quote ID: 9758
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 3
Section: 3C1
(13.) I say this without in any way desiring to force you to a complete unity of judgment in regard to this truly idle question, whatever its real nature may be.
Quote ID: 9759
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 4
Section: 3C1
While the people of God, whose fellow-servant I am, are so divided among themselves by an unreasonable and wicked spirit of contention, how is it possible that I shall be able to maintain a tranquil mind?
Quote ID: 9760
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 13
Section: 2D3A,3C1
Wherefore we all worship one true God, and believe that he is. But in order that this might be done, by divine admonition I assembled at the city of Nicæa most of the bishops; with whom I myself also, who am but one of you, and who rejoice exceedingly in being your fellow-servant, undertook the investigation of the truth. Accordingly, all points which seemed in consequence of ambiguity to furnish any pretext for dissension, have been discussed and accurately examined.
And may the Divine Majesty pardon the fearful enormity of the blasphemies which some were shamelessly uttering concerning the mighty Saviour, our life and hope; declaring and confessing that they believe things contrary to the divinely inspired Scriptures. While more than three hundred bishops remarkable for their moderation and intellectual keenness, were unanimous in their confirmation of one and the same faith, which according to the truth and legitimate construction of the law of God can only be the faith; Arius alone beguiled by the subtlety of the devil, was discovered to be the sole disseminator of this mischief, first among you, and afterwards with unhallowed purposes among others also. Let us therefore embrace that doctrine which the Almighty has presented to us: let us return to our beloved brethren from whom an irreverent servant of the devil has separated us: let us go with all speed to the common body and our own natural members. For this is becoming your penetration, faith and sanctity; that since the
error has been proved to be due to him who is an enemy to the truth, ye should return to the divine favor.
Quote ID: 9761
Time Periods: 4
Socrates, NPNF2 Vol. 2, Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical Histories
adapted by AJW
Book ID: 682 Page: 34–35
Section: 3C1
“As he approached the place called Constantine’s Forum, where the column of porphyry is erected, a terror arising from the remorse of conscience seized Arius, and with the terror a violent relaxation of the bowels: he therefore enquired whether there was a convenient place near, and being directed to the back of Constantine’s Forum, he hastened thither. Soon after a faintness came over him, and together with the evacuations his bowels protruded, followed by a copious hemorrhage, and the descent of the smaller intestines: moreover portions of his spleen and liver were brought off in the effusion of blood, so that he almost immediately died.”
Quote ID: 9762
Time Periods: 457
Tertullian, ANF Vol. 3, Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian
Edited by Philip Schaff and Alan Menzies
Book ID: 678 Page: 598
Section: 3C1
“. . . especially in the case of this heresy, which supposes itself to possess the pure truth, in thinking that one cannot believe in One Only God in any other way than by saying that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are the very selfsame Person. As if in this way also one were not All, in that All are of One, by unity (that is) of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the name of the Farther, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. How they are susceptible of number without division will be shown as our treatise proceeds.”PJ footnote reference: Tertullian, Against Praxeas, II.
Quote ID: 9733
Time Periods: 2
Theodosius: The Empire at Bay
Stephen Williams, Gerard Friell
Book ID: 282 Page: 49
Section: 3C1
The most far-reaching of all the fourth-century disputes concerned the heresy of Arius, a presbyter of Alexandria. He held that Christ, though sharing uniquely in the Divine nature, was created by the Father and is therefore of distinctly subordinate status, belonging to the created order. This was vigorously opposed by Alexander, Arius’ bishop, as tending towards two divinities (Ditheism).{6}
Quote ID: 7088
Time Periods: 4
Theodosius: The Empire at Bay
Stephen Williams, Gerard Friell
Book ID: 282 Page: 49
Section: 3C1
Arianism also seemed to invite doubts about the status of the clergy and Christ’s redemptive mission. If Christ was part of the created order, how far could the Divine quality he had exercised on earth be bequeathed undiminished into the future?
Quote ID: 7089
Time Periods: 4
Theodosius: The Empire at Bay
Stephen Williams, Gerard Friell
Book ID: 282 Page: 50
Section: 3C1
Constantine had no understanding of these subtleties and no patience with them. Indeed, he was little concerned with Christ at all.{8}He had opted for the God of the Christians against Sol Invictus because it had seemed to offer the best promise of divine favour for the Roman state, which it was the emperor’s duty to secure by the proper forms of worship. The church had been granted many special privileges by him, and in return he wanted unity in it, not continual quarrelling over hair-splitting matters.{9}….
As Pontifex Maximus the emperor had always regulated the state cults and religion in general, and Constantine quite naturally intervened in the Christian disputes. In 325 he called, for the first time, a general or oecumenical council of some 300 bishops from all over the empire, at Nicaea in Bithynia.{10}
….
By a large majority it condemned Arius, whom Constantine then banished. It also confirmed the superior ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the sees of Alexandria, Antioch and Rome over other cities, and endorsed a church organisation following the boundaries of the existing provinces.
Quote ID: 7090
Time Periods: 4
Theodosius: The Empire at Bay
Stephen Williams, Gerard Friell
Book ID: 282 Page: 51
Section: 3C1
The split turned into open schism at the council of Serdica.{12} The new emperor, Constantius, was pro-Arian and did much to undermine the Nicene party. Supported by the Arian bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia, he manipulated special councils at Arles, Mursa, and Constantinople, and finally had the Arian formula of ’like essence’ declared orthodoxy.{13}
Quote ID: 7092
Time Periods: 4
Theodosius: The Empire at Bay
Stephen Williams, Gerard Friell
Book ID: 282 Page: 52
Section: 3C1
By the time of the battle of Adrianople the East was predominantly Arian under the patronage of Valens, but with a strong Nicene minority grouped around bishop Basil of Caesarea. The West was staunchly Nicene, under the patronage of Gratian and the leadership of Alexandria and Rome.
Quote ID: 7095
Time Periods: 4
Theodosius: The Empire at Bay
Stephen Williams, Gerard Friell
Book ID: 282 Page: 53/54
Section: 3C1,3D1
The purge against Arianism was not an edifying affair, as even its supporters admitted. Demophilus, the principled Arian bishop of Constantinople, refused to subscribe to the Nicene creed and was deposed immediately. The Arian clergy were supported by popular demonstrations, and at Constantinople the new Nicene priests were installed in the churches only by armed force, though a number of Arian clergy converted and kept their posts. Theodosius received Gregory of Nazianzus graciously, and with a typical theatrical flair mounted an imposing ceremony for his enthronement as bishop, accompanying him in solemn procession to the Church of the Apostles. Even so, it required a stiff guard against the jeering crowds, and Gregory himself, a gentle man, related sadly that it was more like the entry of a hostile conqueror into a defeated city.
Quote ID: 7103
Time Periods: 4
Voting about God in Early Church Councils
Ramsay MacMullen
Book ID: 285 Page: 20
Section: 3C1
a group of recalcitrant bishops at Nicaea confronted the emperor, himself attended by his great judges and military commanders in his own palace and speaking in Latin, the language of command. He anticipated no trouble. A minority present, however, were unwise enough at first to offer their own credal text for consideration which “all the bishops tore to pieces on the spot,” making “a huge uproar.” After the ensuing debate, the emperor’s High Panjandrum, by name (in Greek) “Beloved”, then personally carried round the creed the emperor had approved for everyone to sign if they wished to be spared the penalty of exile; which, needless to say, most did--to be condemned later as hypocrites. There were 17 (or 22?) of these latter. With a little reflection, they were reduced to four; and, as they had no doubt foreseen, those four were carted off to some part of the Roman Gulag, some obscure corner of semi-desert away west or far south, there to repent. {28}
Quote ID: 7263
Time Periods: 4
Voting about God in Early Church Councils
Ramsay MacMullen
Book ID: 285 Page: 38
Section: 3C1
Enough, except to notice one feature: the punchy, sloganeering short phrases employed. The very same may be assumed in songs by Arius, “songs,” a church historian tells us, “written for sailors, millers, travellers and all such folk” (whom the historian holds in contempt) “arranged to tunes as he thought each was best suited; and by this style he drew over the more ignorant folk to his impieties.” {44} The scene was Alexandria at about the same time as the angel’s appearance to Licinius; and what was so successful for Arius offered rewards to others arrested later in Antioch, Hippo in Africa, Constantinople, Edessa, Nisibis and Milan--that is (we may safely say) everywhere, in service to religious instruction; adapted to the teachings of every conceivable faith, too, whether Nicene or other.
Quote ID: 7267
Time Periods: 4
Voting about God in Early Church Councils
Ramsay MacMullen
Book ID: 285 Page: 39
Section: 3C1
The second device by which bishops could expect to reach a wide audience, necessarily one ill-informed and not good at following any sort of complicated statement, was by personal names: Arius’ teaching were Arianism, and so forth. A good text to show how it worked is the law of AD 435, where the emperor in fulminating spirit declares, {46}Nestorius, the author of a monstrous superstition shall be condemned and his followers shall be branded with the mark of an appropriate name so that they may not misuse the title of Christians. But just as the Arians, by a law of Constantine of sainted memory are called Porphyrians from Porphyrius, on account of the similiarity of their impiety, so adherents of the nefarious sect of the Nestorians shall everywhere be called Simonians [after Simon Magus of the bible].
Quote ID: 7268
Time Periods: 45
Voting about God in Early Church Councils
Ramsay MacMullen
Book ID: 285 Page: 41
Section: 3C1
At Nicaea in AD 325 some 200 bishops assemblied. The total is not certain: perhaps a little below that figure, probably a little above it. Not all who attended signed, as was not unusual at the end of the councils nor surprising at this one, given its special difficulties. The exact number doesn’t matter. {1} It was soon inflated, to 270, to 300, and so to 318 within a generation. In the Greek system of numeration by letters of the alphabet, it was noticed that a tau, iota, and eta standing for 318 began with a cross ‘T’, went on to “Jesus” (IE . . .), and recalled the number of Abraham’s servants at Genesis 14:14. In this, Hilary and others saw the significance. So at 318 the total was stabilized and became a sort of shorthand for the council and its published creed.
Quote ID: 7269
Time Periods: 4
Voting about God in Early Church Councils
Ramsay MacMullen
Book ID: 285 Page: 47
Section: 3C1
Theolocical argument that went off the tracks invited God’s rebuke. The proof to ponder most fearfully was Arius. All the ancient church historians expatiate on his hideous end, his guts spilling out, with every circumstance of degradation and horror. Generally God’s vengeance was seen as striking at the victim’s genitals and bowels, with a confusion of feces and urine in the mouth, it might be, and worms pouring out of disgusting sores and orifices. Such was Arius’ fate, arch-heretic. The latrine where he died was shown as a sort of tourist point. As to his teachings, Ambrose in a council could demand a curse on them: “Are you hesitating to condemn, when after divine judgement he burst open at the middle?!”
Quote ID: 7270
Time Periods: 4
End of quotes