Page:The Greek and Eastern churches.djvu/107

Rh subsequent approaches to an explanation—over and above the mere orthodox affirmation—of the incarnation have moved in the direction here indicated by Apollinaris; they have denied the existence of the enormous gulf commonly thought to separate human nature from God, and they have asserted a natural affinity between God and man, a something in us that is akin to God, and therefore correlatively a something in God that is akin to us. Some zealous opponents of Arianism were driven by the recoil of their attack on the heresy back on the Sabellianism that Arius had originally set out to resist. Thus they played into the hands of their opponents, who could turn round on the Nicene party saying, "There; that is just what we told you—you are Sabellian." was one of these too thoroughgoing champions of the homoousion doctrine. He was a friend of Athanasius, who long defended him from the suspicion of Sabellianism; but when at last his position became too clear to be doubted, the great patriarch was driven to correct him. Still more pronounced was the Sabellianism of his disciple, bishop of Sirmium, who was condemned in a synod at that city.

Meanwhile the Arians were pushing their views to a logical conclusion with regard to the whole conception of the Trinity. At first only the doctrine of the nature of Christ was in question. But the enquiry could not stop there. The notions we entertain concerning the second Person of the Trinity must affect our ideas of the third. If the Son is a creature, it will be impossible not to assert that the Spirit also is a creature. Athanasius met with this view when in exile in the Thebaid, coming across Arians who went beyond Arius in asserting that the Holy Spirit was not only a creature but "one of the ministering spirits"; he says they were called Figuraturists, and Fighters against the Spirit. Probably not much would