Always he appeals to the people's own faith and hope. Again and again he sets forth as his conviction that if Jesus was not true God then He cannot be the Saviour.
He was truly a great man. Even Gibbon lays aside, as has been said, "his solemn sneer" to do honor to the memory of this champion of the faith, who never lost heart, but could make of failure "a triumph's evidence for the fulness of days. He lived to be over a hundred and was for half that time "the most influential bishop in Christendom.
It was he whom Constantine sent to Alexandria at the beginning of the controversy with an official rebuke of Arius. He also advised and represented Constantine at Nicea. Again, due to lack of official records we do not know much about what he did at that Council.
He seems to have had much influence. Athanasius says that the Creed of Nicea was in large measure composed by him. Most historians agree that it was probably at Hosius' behest that Constantine proposed the insertion of the word homoousios into the Creed. Whether or not that is true we know that he regarded the word as a bulwark against Arianism.
Athanasius invariably refers to him as "the Great," and says of him: Of the great Hosius, who answers to his name, that confessor of a happy old age. When was there a Council held in which he did not take the lead, and by right counsel convince every one? Where is there a Church that does not possess some glorious monuments of his patronage?
Who has ever come to him in sorrow, and has not gone away rejoicing? He was one of the three or four banished by the Council of Milan , the only ones in the whole empire who would not subscribe to Arianism and a condemnation of Athanasius. Although they arose out of the ranks of the Semi-Arians, they were the ones who finally vindicated orthodoxy and implemented the final union of Orthodox and Semi-Arians.
They also further developed the doctrines of Nicea in combating Macedonianism and Apollinarianism. They all saw that the question of Christ's divinity involved His efficacy as a Savior, and thus, eventually they too came to defend Nicene faith. Burn calls him "the great western ally" of Athanasius. He did much to clarify the terms which had resulted in so much confusion at Nicea. It was his work in this area that finally made the union of Orthodox and Semi-Arians possible. Athanasius, Berkhof says, strongly emphasized the unity of God and insisted on a construction of the doctrine of the Trinity that would not endanger this unity.
His views are best presented by quoting him. In his own statement of faith we have a brief and clear picture of what he taught: We believe in one Unbegotten God, Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible, that hath His being from Himself. And in one Only-begotten Word, Wisdom, Son, begotten of the Father without beginning and eternally; word not pronounced, nor mental, nor an effluence of the Perfect, nor a dividing of the impassible Essence, nor an issue; but absolutely perfect Son, living and powerful Heb.
Neither do we ascribe the passible body which He bore for the salvation of the whole world to the Father. Neither can we imagine three Subsistences separated from each other, as results from their bodily nature in the case of men, lest we hold a plurality of Gods like the heathen. For it would be inconsistent with His deity for Him to be called a creature. For all things were created by the Father through the Son, but the Son alone was eternally begotten from the Father, whence God the Word is "first-born of all creation," unchangeable from unchangeable.
This was by far the largest party in the controversy. The party itself arose at Nicea out of opposition to the use of the word homoousios, though it also rejected emphatically the views of Arius.
In spite of the fact that the party really stood closer to the Orthodox doctrinally, and even though all signed the Creed of Nicea, the party afterwards sided with the ultra-Arians in opposition to the Orthodox. Many of them did not even understand the point at issue and in the interest of Church unity tried to compromise.
That compromise was never really successful. The many excesses of the Arian party eventually drove them closer and closer to the Orthodox. Finally, through the patient work of Athanasius and Hilary and the leadership of the Three Cappadocians they were united to the Orthodox in confession of homoousios. On the whole, they too held to eternal generation and the true divinity of the Son. They avoided homoousios, especially because of its Sabellian connotations. They proposed homoiousios, "of like substance," as an alternative term at Nicea and that word became their battlecry.
From every point of view he is an excellent representative. In one person he represents the feelings of the whole Semi-Arian party: vacillating, indecisive, generally on the side of the Arians against Athanasius.
But he is so inconsistent and indecisive that it is difficult to tell exactly what he believed. Most agree that he leaned toward Arianism but on the whole simply was not able to make up his mind where he stood: At bottom, he thought like Arius; but in proportion as the latter was clear and precise in his explanations, so did the Bishop of Caesarea excel in clothing his ideas in a diffuse and flowing style, and in using many words to say nothing.
As Bishop of Caesarea he was succeeded by Acaius, a friend of the Arians. Nevertheless, they hold a special place in the controversy and must be taken into account. Their interference in Church affairs made both the temporary triumph of Arianism and the final victory of Orthodoxy possible. After becoming sole ruler of the Roman Empire he gave official recognition to the Christian church and used it as a force to weld together his huge empire.
But he united the Empire under the banners of Christianity, only to find that the Church itself was divided and in turmoil over the Arian question. He was determined to have unity and called together the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea to end the strife. He himself took a leading hand in the controversy and attended the Council of Nicea as well as several subsequent Councils in person. His desire for Church unity made itself felt in the Council. Probably at the prompting of Hosius he supported the Orthodox, and himself proposed the addition of homoousios to the Creed when it became evident that nothing else would do.
Once passed, the decisions of Nicea were zealously defended by him. Those who spoke against the Creed or showed a spirit of rebellion he sent into exile Arius, Eusebius of Nicomedia, Theognis of Nicea.
While he lived the Orthodox party held sway. His interest in the question was primarily political. He does not seem to have had a great deal of interest in the question as such, dismissing it as petty bickering:. Two of them, his son Constantius and, later Valens, supported the Arians, even to the extent of persecuting the Orthodox. The rest more or less supported the Orthodox. Most of the time the Empire was divided not only politically, but also ecclesiastically, between two Emperors, the Eastern Emperor supporting Arianism, and the Western Athanasius.
Gratian and Theodosius secured the final victory of the Orthodox. There were some twenty or twenty-five councils held and nine or ten Creeds drawn up all in the space of less than fifty years. We will therefore, attempt to be brief and clear.
After several private remonstrances by Alexander his Bishop showed that he was unwilling to retract, severer measures were taken. In Alexander called together a Synod of the Egyptian Bishops. About attended and proceeded to depose Arius. When he continued to agitate and teach his views, he was forced to leave Alexandria. Arius went to Palestine and from there entered into correspondence with Eusebius of Nicomedia and Eusebius of Caesarea.
The former immediately gave his full support. He flooded the East with letters, trying to drum up support for Arius, and wrote to Alexander urging him to receive Arius back into communion.
Two Synods were held: one in Bithynia which agreed with Arius and advised Alexander to withdraw his verdict, and another in Palestine which confirmed Arius and his adherents in their clerical status and offices. In September, , he had defeated his opponent, Licinius, at the battle of Chrysopolis and had become the sole ruler of the Empire.
Desiring unity in the Church as he had gained it in the Empire, he immediately took upon himself the role of peacemaker in the controversy. He sent his trusted aide and advisor, Hosius, to Alexandria with a letter entreating both parties to make peace. A council was then held at Alexandria which accomplished nothing. Apparently Hosius returned with a report which favored Alexander, for Constantine wrote a vehement letter to Arius demanding his submission.
This, too, accomplished little. Constantine, probably at the suggestion of Hosius, therefore resolved to call a Council of Bishops from the whole Empire to rule on the matter in question.
It was decided to hold the Council at Nicea which was at the center of the Empire and accessible from land and sea. They traveled and were hosted at the public expense. They came to take care of three problems: the Meletian schism, the settling of the date of Easter, and the case of Arius. The last was the most important.
Of the Bishops present there were only seven from the West, the principals being Hosius, two presbyters who represented Pope Silvester, and the Bishop of Carthage. Although Arius had claimed the support of all the East save two or three "heretical and untutored persons," at the Council his party was a very small minority — about 18 bishops.
The Arians led by Eusebius of Nicomedia, first proposed a Creed, a concise statement of their views. It was received with "tumultuous disapproval" 31 and torn to pieces in the sight of all. At this point the whole Arian party including Eusebuis of Nicomedia with the exception of two Egyptian Bishops, Theonas and Secundus, abandoned the cause of Arius. Eusebius of Caesarea then stood up and presented the Creed of his church.
Whatever language was proposed, whatever phrase was used, the Arians twisted it to suit their own ends:. It was evident that something was needed to guard against all Arian evasions. The Emperor himself, again at the prompting of Hosius, formally proposed the word homoousios. After a long debate the word was finally adopted and the Creed of Eusebius was thereupon thoroughly revised under the direction of Hosius and several others. It was presented to and approved by the Council at the urging of the Emperor.
All were required to sign it, and all did except for Arius, Theonas, and Secundus. After a day's deliberation Eusebius of Caesarea also signed, though he disliked the word homoousios. Arius' books were burned and he was sent into exile to Illyria.
The Emperor had made up his mind to admit no compromise and so also Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nicea were banished for their evident hostility to the Creed, even though they had signed it.
After being entertained by the Emperor at a great Banquet, the Bishops left for their respective Sees and the first Ecumenical Council was over. In the meantime Alexander died April 17, and Athanasius was made Bishop of Alexandria by common consent of populace and clergy. But the quiet was only the lull before the storm.
Arius drew up a personal creed 35 which he presented to the Emperor as proof of his good faith. And although the Creed carefully avoids all the terminology of Nicea, the Emperor received Arius back into communion.
So also, by exercising his political influence, Eusebius also returned. Both were back by Eusebius especially was ready to move heaven and earth to efface the results of Nicea. His first target was Athanasius. The ensuing history is as violent as it is complicated: The controversy now for the first time fairly broke loose and Arianism entered the stage of its political development and power. An intermediate period of great excitement ensued, during which council was held oven against council, creed was set forth against creed and anathema against anathema was hurled.
The pagan Ammianus Marcellinus says of the councils under Constantius: "The highways were covered with galloping bishops;" and even Athanasius rebuked the restless flutter of the clergy, who journeyed the empire over to find the true faith, and provoked the ridicule and contempt of the unbelieving world. In intolerance and violence the Arians exceeded the Orthodox, and contested elections of bishops not rarely came to bloody encounters. The interference of imperial polities only poured oil on the flame, and embarrassed the natural course of theological development.
They secured the deposition of Eustathius of Antioch, one of the supporters of Athanasius, on false charges of immorality and Sabellianism backed by the complaint that he had indiscreetly repeated a current story concerning the Emperor's Mother. Meanwhile, by alliance with the Meletians, the Arians were doing everything they could to foment disturbances in Egypt. The purpose of this all was to discredit Athanasius in the eyes of Constantine. Eusebius was also busy at the Capitol using various channels to prefer all sorts of false charges against Athanasius, especially that he had been supporting treasonable persons.
He also wrote to Athanasius, exhorting him to receive Arius, and when Athanasius refused, complained to Constantine. Athanasius finally cleared himself of all charges by appearing before the Emperor in person. Eusebius continued to bring accusations and prevailed finally upon Constantine to call a Council in Caesarea where Athanasius had many enemies to deal with these new charges.
Athanasius refused to appear and the council fizzled. In another council was held at Tyre in connection with the Thirtieth anniversary of Constantine's reign.
All the enemies of Athanasius in the whole empire arranged to be present, hoping to obtain at Tyre their revenge for the abortive council at Caesarea, and to find means of getting rid of the troublesome Bishop of Alexandria. The council was very disorderly and many trumped-up charges were brought against Athanasius: that he had disrupted a worship service and broken a chalice; that he had put to death a Meletian Bishop; that he had committed adultery. Athanasius cleared himself of all charges but in the subsequent disorder was obliged to flee the council.
In his absence the council proceeded to depose him. Athanasius appealed to Constantine who wrote a letter to the Council defending him. The Eusebians responded by sending five representatives to the Emperor with a new charge: that Athanasius was threatening to stop grain shipments from Alexandria to Constantinople. This was a sore spot for Constantine, and without even a hearing, he immediately ordered Athanasius into exile at Treves.
This exile lasted less than a year, for Constantine died soon after Arius also died meanwhile in the midst of preparations for his formal reception into Church communion February, Athanasius was in Alexandria only two years before he was again forced to go into exile.
Constantius, the new ruler of the Eastern part of the Empire patronized the Arians and with his approval the Arians and Semi-Arians held a Synod at Antioch where they again deposed Athanasius, and appointed a successor, Gregory of Cappadocia. The arrest of Athanasius was ordered but he escaped first into the desert, and then to Rome. This time he was in exile for six years. While Athanasius was in Rome the Arians corresponded with Pope Julius, attempting to gain his support.
But at a Synod in Rome Athanasius was completely vindicated and Julius wrote a letter to that effect to the Arians. Julius' letter was considered at the Council of Dedication of Constantius' "Golden Church" held in Antioch in the summer of They again confirmed the deposition of Athanasius and drew up four anti-Nicene creeds which were mainly Semi-Arian in construction.
Together, he and Constantius arranged for a council to be held at Sandica in The council failed completely. About Western Bishops, as well as Athanasius and several others who had been deposed, attended. The Eastern Bishops refused even to come when they found that they were in a minority and that the defendants were to be seated at the Council. They held their own Synod at Philipopolis, drew up a long and angry statement of principles, and deposed everyone from Pope Julius to Hosius.
The Western Bishops again confirmed the orthodoxy of Athanasius and refuted the charges of the Eusebians. And at another Council at Milan the position of Sardica was reaffirmed.
Constans, the Western Emperor, defended Athanasius and urged his brother to restore him to his See. Gregory, Athanasius' "successor" had died, and the people of Alexandria were also clamoring for the return of their rightful Bishop. Constantius did an abrupt about-face and invited Athanasius to return, giving him strong assurances of good-will and protection.
Athanasius met with Constantius at Antioch and then returned to Alexandria where he was received with rejoicing. This restoration marks the beginning of his longest stay in Alexandria 10 years. Burn calls it "an armed truce" which was maintained by the formidable power of Constans. For three years Constantius was busy consolidating his powers and defeating his rivals.
But in he became sole ruler of the Empire and the axe fell on Athanasius once again. Constantius was false to his pledges and immediately began working to establish Arianism as the religion of the Empire. In at the Synod of Arles, a formal Imperial condemnation of Athanasius was made.
In at Milan, the Western Bishops were forced to ascribe to and sign the deposition of Athanasius. Those who refused to sign Hosius, Pope Liberius, and Hilary of Potiers were the only ones were sent into exile. Athanasius himself remained in Alexandria until early , when, in spite of the support of the populace and magistrates of Alexandria, he was deposed by force of arms, and very nearly lost his life before escaping into the desert once again.
A certain George was made Bishop in his place and a period of terrible persecution and violence began in Alexandria. Many were killed or banished.
Athanasius himself remained in exile until the death of Constantius, nearly six more years. During this six-year period a large number of councils were held, in the course of which the Arian cause finally triumphed.
The synod of Sirmium, held in , condemned the word ousios as being unscriptural and proscribed both the words homo- and homoiousios. But the triumph of Arianism also marked it's downfall, for the decisions of Sirmium, and Constantinople a little later, drove the Semi-Arians into the party of the Orthodox. The Council of Constantinople in is the high point of ultra-Arianism, but it also marks the end of the Arian and Semi-Arian league.
At that council both the Orthodox and the Semi-Arian positions were condemned and many of the Semi-Arian leaders were deposed or excommunicated. The Arians retained power for a brief time, but their days were numbered. In Constantius died. This was the beginning of the end for Arianism, and in the next period we see the final victory of the Orthodox party. The Arian victory had prepared the way for the ruin of Arianism, though that result was not immediately apparent.
The Christian church, like the Judaic church before it, was committed to monotheism: all the Abrahamic religions say there is only one God. Arius — CE , a fairly obscure scholar and presbyter at Alexandria and originally from Libya, is said to have argued that the incarnation of Jesus Christ threatened that monotheistic status of the Christian church, because he was not of the same substance as God, instead a creature made by God and so capable of vice.
The Council of Nicea was called, in part, to resolve this issue. The first council of Nicea Nicaea was the first ecumenical council of the Christian church, and it lasted between May and August, CE. It was held in Nicea, Bithynia in Anatolia, modern Turkey , and a total of bishops attended, according to the records of the bishop at Nicea, Athanasius bishop from — The number is a symbolic number for the Abrahamic religions: basically, there would be one participant at Nicea to represent each of the members of the Biblical Abraham's household.
The Nicean council had three goals:. Athanasius — CE was an important fourth-century Christian theologian and one of the eight great Doctors of the Church. He was also the major, albeit polemical and biased, contemporary source we have on the beliefs of Arius and his followers. Athanasius' interpretation was followed by the later Church historians Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret.
When Christianity took hold in the Roman Empire , the doctrine had yet to be fixed. A council is an assembly of theologians and church dignitaries called together to discuss the doctrine of the church. There have been 21 councils of what became the Catholic Church—17 of them occurred before The problems of interpretation part of the doctrinal issues , emerged when theologians tried to rationally explain the simultaneously divine and human aspects of Christ.
This was especially difficult to do without resorting to pagan concepts, in particular having more than one divine being. Once the councils had determined such aspects of doctrine and heresy, as they did in the early councils, they moved on to church hierarchy and behavior. The Arians were not opponents of the orthodox position because orthodoxy had yet to be defined. At heart, the controversy in front of the church was how to fit Christ into the religion as a divine figure without disrupting the notion of monotheism.
In the 4th century, there were several possible ideas that would account for that. When Alexander accused Arius of denying the second and third person of the Godhead, Arius accused Alexander of Sabellian tendencies.
The sticking point at the Nicene Council was a concept found nowhere in the Bible: homoousion. Arius and Eusebius disagreed. Arius thought the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were materially separate from each other, and that the Father created the Son as a separate entity: the argument hinged on the birth of Christ to a human mother. Here is a passage from a letter Arian wrote to Eusebius :. Athanasius becomes bishop of Alexandria on June 8th. Both Eusebius of Caesarea and Eusebius of Nicomedia have leading roles in this synod.
Athanasius is deposed and so goes to complain to the Emperor Constantine, whom he encounters mid-road. After Athanasius persists in requesting an audience, Constantine agrees to hear his complaint.
Some of the bishops flee home, but Eusebius of Nicomedia and his consort go to meet with Constantine. He had written a treatise in defending the Nicene theology, but was considered a Sabellian by his opponents. His eulogy is delivered by Eusebius of Caesarea. On June 17th, Constantius, orders the return of Athanasius to Alexandria. Gregory, a man from Cappadocia not Gregory of Nazianzus or Gregory of Nyssa , takes over as bishop of Athanasius' see. He supports the Nicenes and Athanasius, while his brother in the east, Constantius, as we know, opposes the Nicene theology.
Of the ninety-seven bishops present, none are from the West and most are hostile to Athanasius. During this council, the First , Second and Third Arian Confessions are written, thereby beginning the attempt to produce a formal doctrine of faith to oppose the Nicene Creed.
The Fourth Arian Confession is written at the second council of the year. The bishops of the east deny being Arians, issuing the famous statement, "How, being bishops, should we follow a priest? The council is a fiasco. The western bishops and eastern bishops separate and denounce each other. The west release a statement claiming to be an attack on Arianism, the East retire to Philippopolis and release a statement, dated from Sardica, which justifies the deposition of Athanasius and Marcellus and condemns Julius I and others.
To this is appended the 4th creed of Antioch with additional anathemas directed at Marcellus. Here, the council writes the Fifth Arian Confession or Macrostich , which is notably longer than the confessions written at Antioch in
0コメント