Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume X/Works/Exposition of the Christian Faith/Book I/Chapter 2

Chapter I.

The author distinguishes the faith from the errors of Pagans, Jews, and Heretics, and after explaining the significance of the names &#8220;God&#8221; and &#8220;Lord,&#8221; shows clearly the difference of Persons in Unity of Essence. &#160;In dividing the Essence, the Arians not only bring in the doctrine of three Gods, but even overthrow the dominion of the Trinity.

6. this is the declaration of our Faith, that we say that God is One, neither dividing His Son from Him, as do the heathen, nor denying, with the Jews, that He was begotten of the Father before all worlds, and afterwards born of the Virgin; nor yet, like Sabellius, confounding the Father with the Word, and so maintaining that Father and Son are one and the same Person; nor again, as doth Photinus, holding that the Son first came into existence in the Virgin&#8217;s womb: nor believing, with Arius, Arius was a presbyter of Alexandria; the origin of his heresy, however, is, as Cardinal Newman has shown, to be sought in Syria rather than in Egypt, in the sophistic method of the Antiochene schools more than in the mysticism of the Alexandrian. It was in the year 319 that Arius began to attract attention by his heterodox teaching, which led eventually to his excommunication. He found favour, however, with men of considerable importance in the Church, such as Eusebius of C&#230;sarea in Palestine, Eusebius of Nicomedia, Athanasius of Anazarbus, and others. The question was finally discussed in a synod of bishops convened, on the summons of the Emperor Constantine, at Nic&#230;a in Bithynia. The acts of that Council condemned Arianism&#8212;notwithstanding which, the heresy prevailed in the East till the reign of Theodosius the Great (379&#8211;395 ); and having won the acceptance of the Goths, it was predominant in Gaul and Italy during the fifth century, and in Spain till the Council of Toledo (589 ), and its influence affected Christian thought for centuries afterwards&#8212;possibly it is not even yet dead.

Arius urged the following dilemma: &#8220;Either the Son is an original Divine Essence; if so we must acknowledge two Gods. Or He was created, formed, begotten; if so, He is not God in the same sense as the Father is God.&#8221; Arius himself chose the latter alternative, which St. Ambrose regarded as a lapse into paganism, with its &#8220;gods many and lords many,&#8221; dii majores and dii minores, and divinities begotten of gods and goddesses.

Arius&#8217;s errors are summarized in the anathema appended to the original Nicene Creed. &#8220;But those who say that there was a time when the Son of God was not, or that He had no existence before He was begotten, or that He was formed of things non-existent, or who assert that the Son of God is of a different substance or essence, or is created, mutable, or variable, these men the Catholic and Apostolic Church of God holds accursed.&#8221; in a number of diverse Powers, and so, like the benighted heathen, making out more than one God. For it is written: &#8220;Hear, O Israel: the Lord thy God is one God.&#8221;

7. For God and Lord is a name of majesty, a name of power, even as God Himself saith: &#8220;The Lord is My name,&#8221; and as in another place the prophet declareth: &#8220;The Lord Almighty is His name.&#8221; God is He, therefore, and Lord, either because His rule is over all, or because He beholdeth all things, and is feared by all, without difference.

8. If, then, God is One, one is the name,

one is the power, of the Trinity. Christ Himself, indeed, saith: &#8220;Go ye, baptize the nations in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.&#8221; In the name, mark you, not in the names.&#8221;

9. Moreover, Christ Himself saith: &#8220;I and the Father are One.&#8221; &#8220;One,&#8221; said He, that there be no separation of power and nature; but again, &#8220;We are,&#8221; that you may recognize Father and Son, forasmuch as the perfect Father is believed to have begotten the perfect Son, and the Father and the Son are One, not by confusion of Person, but by unity of nature.

10. We say, then, that there is one God, not two or three Gods, this being the error into which the impious heresy of the Arians doth run with its blasphemies. For it says that there are three Gods, in that it divides the Godhead of the Trinity; whereas the Lord, in saying, &#8220;Go, baptize the nations in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,&#8221; hath shown that the Trinity is of one power. We confess Father, Son, and Spirit, understanding in a perfect Trinity both fulness of Divinity and unity of power.

11. &#8220;Every kingdom divided against itself shall quickly be overthrown,&#8221; saith the Lord. Now the kingdom of the Trinity is not divided. If, therefore, it is not divided, it is one; for that which is not one is divided. The Arians, however, would have the kingdom of the Trinity to be such as may easily be overthrown, by division against itself. But truly, seeing that it cannot be overthrown, it is plainly undivided. For no unity is divided or rent asunder, and therefore neither age nor corruption has any power over it.