HISTORY
OF THE DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE NATURE OF GOD
IN THE EARLY CENTURIES OF CHRISTIANITY
Part 10
ARIANISM AND THE COUNCIL AT NICEA
By the 4th century, THE WEST, THANKS TO THE WORK OF TERTULLIAN AND NOVATIAN,
HAD REACHED PRACTICAL UNANIMITY REGARDING THE UNITY OF SUBSTANCE BETWEEN CHRIST
AND FATHER (in a more or less modified or restyled "Logos-Christology").
[5] THE EAST, where MUCH MORE INTELLECTUAL ABILITY and INTEREST in SPECULATIVE
THEOLOGY WAS TO BE FOUND, WAS DIVIDED. ORIGEN, who taught that Christ WAS A
SECOND GOD, GENERATED by the Father, was very influential. SABELLIANISM WAS TO
BE FOUND predominant IN
The Arian struggle BEGAN IN
basic doctrine found its SEED in the LOGOS-CHRISTOLOGY teaching. [4] He also WAS
A FOLLOWER OF ORIGEN, in that HE believed that CHRIST WAS A CREATED BEING, MADE
OF NOTHING. CHRIST WAS A LOWER GOD than THE FATHER. IN THE INCARNATION, THE
LOGOS ENTERED A HUMAN BODY, TAKING THE PLACE OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT. TO ARIUS'
THINKING CHRIST WAS NEITHER FULLY GOD NOR FULLY MAN, BUT A "TERTIUM QUID"
BETWEEN. [5]
THE FIRST CHRISTIANS WERE ALL OF ONE MIND WITH REGARD TO THE DIVINITY OF JESUS
CHRIST. "THEY SING HYMNS, SAID PLINEY, TO THE CHRIST WHOM THEY HONOR AS GOD."
[15]
BISHOP ALEXANDER WAS INFLUENCED BY THE OTHER SIDE OF ORIGEN'S TEACHING. TO HIM,
THE SON WAS ETERNAL, LIKE IN ESSENCE TO THE FATHER, AND WHOLLY UNCREATED.
IN 321, ARIUS was CONDEMNED. ARIANS FOUND A REFUGE IN THE POWERFUL BISHOP,
EUSEBIUS OF NICODEMIA. Both parties WROTE WIDELY TO FELLOW BISHOPS, defending
their position. THE QUARREL THREATENED THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH THAT the new
Emperor, CONSTANTINE, DEEMED ESSENTIAL. [5]
THE ARIANS PRESENTED A STATEMENT OF THEIR POSITION, BUT THIS AROUSED VIOLENT
OPPOSITION (chiefly because Christ was said to be divested of Deity prior to
His baptism). EUSEBIUS OF CAESARIA, WHO TOOK A MIDDLE POSITION BUT WAS AGAINST
ANY LEANING TOWARDS SABELLIANISM AND HENCE WAS INCLINED TO FAVOR THE ARIANS,
SUGGESTED AS A STATEMENT TO WHICH ALL MIGHT AGREE THE CREED WHICH WAS IN USE IN
HIS OWN SEE (church). [6] IT WAS, however, WHOLLY INDEFINITE AS TO THE
PARTICULAR PROBLEMS INVOLVED, DATING FROM BEFORE THE CONTROVERSY. [5] THIS
SEEMED TO WIN THE GENERAL ASSENT, INCLUDING THE ENDORSEMENT OF THE EMPEROR
Constantine. IT BECAME, THEREFORE THE <BASIS> OF WHAT HAS BEEN KNOWN
AS THE NICEAN CREED. THIS CAESARIAN CREED WAS NOW AMENDED MOST SIGNIFICANT [5]
by a number of changes that rid the creed from wording which could be interpreted
as Arianism and added elaborate definitions to support the new trend.
THE BISHOPS KNEW THAT THE TEST for orthodoxy presented WAS NOT IN SCRIPTURE,
THAT IT HAD A SUSPICIOUS HISTORY IN THE CHURCH. BUT THE FATHERS WERE REMINDED
OF THE PREVIOUS unresolved DISCUSSIONS AND OF THE FUTILITY OF THE SCRIPTURAL
TESTS. WITH A GREAT REVULSION OF FEELING THE COUNCIL CLOSED ITS RANKS AND
SIGNED. EUSEBIUS OF
Constantine, ESSENTIALLY A POLITICIAN, NATURALLY THOUGHT THAT A FORMULA THAT
WOULD FIND NO OPPOSITION IN THE WESTERN HALF OF THE EMPIRE (Northern Italy, the
Balkans, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Bohemia, etc.), AND WHICH WOULD
RECEIVE THE SUPPORT OF A PORTION OF THE EAST, MORE ACCEPTABLE THAN ONE WHICH,
WHILE HAVING ONLY A PART OF THE EAST IN ITS FAVOR, WOULD BE REJECTED BY THE WHOLE
WEST. (The East comprised southern
THE ADOPTION OF THE NICEAN Creed DEFINITELY WAS DUE TO CONSTANTINE'S INFLUENCE.
THAT HE EVER UNDERSTOOD ITS SHADES OF MEANING IS MORE THAN DOUBTFUL: BUT HE
WANTED TO UNITE EXPRESSION OF THE FAITH OF THE CHURCH to
cement his Empire together. [5] (The original Nicean Creed had one predominate
purpose: to defend the Deity of Christ against Arianism, and does not demand a
Trinitarian concept, unless the phrase "God from God" is intended to
imply an eternal generation. The formula adopted is as follows):
WE BELIEVE IN ONE GOD, FATHER, ALMIGHTY,
MAKER OF ALL THINGS VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE; AND IN ONE LORD JESUS CHRIST THE SON
OF GOD, BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER, ONLY-BEGOTTEN, THAT IS FROM THE SUBSTANCE OF
THE FATHER, GOD FROM GOD, LIGHT FROM LIGHT, TRUE GOD FROM TRUE GOD, BEGOTTEN,
NOT MADE, OF ONE SUBSTANCE WITH THE FATHER, THROUGH WHOM ALL THINGS WERE MADE,
BOTH THE THINGS IN HEAVEN AND THINGS OF EARTH: WHO FOR US MEN AND FOR OUR SALVATION
CAME DOWN AND WAS MADE FLESH, WAS MADE MAN, SUFFERED, AND ROSE AGAIN ON THE
THIRD DAY, ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN, AND COMETH TO JUDGE QUICK AND DEAD; AND IN THE
HOLY SPIRIT. BUT THOSE WHO SAY 'THERE WAS ONCE WHEN
HE WAS NOT', AND 'BEFORE HIS GENERATION HE WAS NOT', AND 'HE WAS MADE OUT OF
NOTHING'; OR PRETEND THAT THE SON OF GOD IS OF ANOTHER SUBSISTENCE OR SUBSTANCE,
OR CREATED OR ALTERABLE OR MUTABLE, THE
ANATHEMATIZES. [12]
ARIUS PRESENTED TO CONSTANTINE A CREED CAREFULLY INDEFINITE ON THE QUESTION AT
ISSUE. TO
ATHANASIUS TO RESTORE ARIUS TO HIS PLACE IN
THE NICEAN FAITH WAS PRACTICALLY UNDERMINED WHEN
DOCTRINAL DISCUSSIONS THAT EARLIER WOULD HAVE RUN THEIR COURSE WERE NOW POLITICAL
QUESTIONS OF THE FIRST MAGNITUDE now that THE EMPEROR HAD ASSUMED A POWER IN
ECCLESIASTICAL AFFAIRS. [5]
THE ORIGINAL NICEAN SUCCESS HAD BEEN MADE POSSIBLE BY IMPERIAL INTERFERENCE.
THEODOSIUS, IN 380, ISSUED AN EDICT THAT ALL SHOULD HOLD THE FAITH WHICH THE
HOLY APOSTLE PETER GAVE TO THE ROMANS, WHICH HE DEFINED MORE
PARTICULARLY AS THAT TAUGHT BY THE EXISTING BISHOP, DAMACUS OF ROME, AND PETER OF
ALEXANDRIA. HENCEFORTH THERE WAS TO BE BUT ONE RELIGION IN THE EMPIRE. ONLY
THAT FORM OF CHRISTIANITY WAS TO EXIST WHICH TAUGHT ONE DIVINE ESSENCE IN THREE
PERSONS. Arianism and Sabellianism were forbidden.
YET EVEN WHEN THE SYNOD OF 381 MET, THE NICEAN CREED ADOPTED IN 325, FAILED TO
MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THEOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE VICTORIOUS PARTY. A new
CREED CAME INTO USE, AND BY 451 WAS ADOPTED BY THE GENERAL COUNCIL. <IT
ULTIMATELY TOOK THE PLACE OF THE GENUINE NICEAN CREED: AND IS KNOWN AS THE
"NICEAN" TO THIS DAY.> [6]
(The new creed adds several clauses which make it definitely Trinitarian, namely):
1. To the original clause: "The only-begotten Son of God" was added:
"who was begotten of the Father before all the ages."
2. To the clause: "the Holy Spirit" was added: "the Lord, the
life-giver, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and Son is worshipped
and glorified."
The amended creed is as follows:
WE BELIEVE IN ONE GOD 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, <WHO WAS BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER BEFORE ALL THE
AGES,> LIGHT FROM LIGHT, TRUE GOD FROM TRUE GOD, BEGOTTEN NOT MADE, OF
ONE SUBSTANCE WITH THE FATHER, THROUGH WHOM ALL THINGS WERE MADE; WHO FOR
US MEN AND FOR OUR SALVATION CAME DOWN FROM HEAVEN AND WAS INCARNATE OF
THE HOLY SPIRIT AND MARY THE VIRGIN, AND WAS MADE MAN AND WAS CRUCIFIED
ON OUR BEHALF UNDER PONTIUS PILATE, AND SUFFERED AND WAS BURIED, AND ROSE
ON THE THIRD DAY ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES, AND COMETH AGAIN WITH GLORY
TO JUDGE QUICK AND DEAD, OR WHOSE KINGDOM THERE SHALL NOT BE AN END; AND
IN THE HOLY SPIRIT, THE LORD, THE LIFE-GIVER, WHO <PROCEEDETH FROM THE
FATHER>, WHO <WITH FATHER AND SON IS WORSHIPPED AND GLORIFIED>, WHO
SPOKE
THROUGH THE PROPHETS; IN ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH. WE
CONFESS ONE BAPTISM FOR REMISSION OF SINS; WE EXPECT A RESURRECTION OF
THE DEAD AND THE LIFE OF THE AGE TO COME. [12]
IN THE STRUGGLE THE
CYRIL, BISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA, 412-444 APPLIED TO THE VIRGIN
MARY "THEOLOKOS", "GOD BEARING", OR AS USUALLY TRANSLATED,
"MOTHER OF GOD" A TERM WHICH WAS TO BECOME AS SHARP AND BITTER A
THEOLOGICAL CONFLICT AS THE CHURCH HAD KNOWN. IN 340 A SYNOD AT
IF THE STOIC METAPHYSICS HAD BEEN DOMINANT INSTEAD OF THE PLATONIC, AND THE
IMMANENCE OF GOD, OR THE ONENESS OF THE DIVINE AND HUMAN NATURE, HAD BEEN RECOGNIZED
BY THE NICENE THEOLOGIANS, THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY WOULD HAVE BEEN
UNNECESSARY; THE RELIGIOUS INTEREST -- TO FIND GOD IN CHRIST – COULD THEN
HAVE BEEN CONSERVED, AS IT WAS BY THE MODALISTS WITHOUT DISTINGUISHING THE
PRE-EXISTENT SON OF GOD FROM THE FATHER.
THE NICENE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY CONTAINS BOTH A RELIGIOUS AND A PHILOSOPHICAL
ELEMENT, THE FORMER ROOTED IN CHRISTIAN FAITH, THE LATTER THE PRODUCT OF
METAPHYSICS. [12]
(Is there any question that our only hope of recovering the truth rests in the
Word of God, alone? All post-apostolic traditions contrary to the Bible must be
cast aside if we wish to know the God of the scriptures.)
DIONYSIUS POINTed OUT THAT IN OPPOSING SABELLIUS, MANY DIVIDE AND CUT TO PIECES
AND DESTROY THAT MOST SACRED DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH OF GOD, THE DIVINE MONARCHY,
MAKING IT AS IT WERE THREE POWERS. [16].