|
THE above-named bishops, however, did not consent to it in
sincerity, but only in appearance. This was afterwards shewn by their
plotting against those who were foremost in zeal for religion, as well
as by what these latter have written about them. For instance,
Eustathius, the famous bishop of Antioch, who has been already
mentioned, when explaining the text in the Proverbs, 'The Lord
created me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old ,'
wrote against them, and refuted their blasphemy.
"I WILL now proceed to relate how these different events
occurred. A general council was summoned at Nicaea, and about two
hundred and seventy bishops were convened. There were, however, so
many assembled that I cannot state their exact number, neither,
indeed, have I taken any great trouble to ascertain this point. When
they began to inquire into the nature of the faith, the formulary of
Eusebius was brought forward, which contained undisguised evidence of
his blasphemy. The reading of it before all occasioned great grief to
the audience, on account of its departure from the faith, while it
inflicted irremediable shame on the writer. After the Eusebian gang
had been clearly convicted, and the impious writing had been torn up in
the sight of all, some amongst them by concert, under the pretence of
preserving peace, imposed silence on all the ablest speakers. The
Ariomaniacs, fearing lest they should be ejected from the Church by
so numerous a council of bishops, sprang forward to anathematize and
condemn the doctrines condemned, and unanimously signed the confession
of faith. Thus having retained possession of their episcopal seats
through the most shameful deception, although they ought rather to have
been degraded, they continue, sometimes secretly, and sometimes
openly, to patronize the condemned doctrines, plotting against the
truth by various arguments. Wholly bent upon establishing these
plantations of tares, they shrink from the scrutiny of the
intelligent, avoid the observant, and attack the preachers of
godliness. But we do not believe that these atheists can ever thus
overcome the Deity. For though they 'gird themselves' they 'shall
be broken in pieces,' according to the solemn prophecy of Isaiah ."
These are the words of the great Eustathius. Athanasius, his fellow
combatant, the champion of the truth, who succeeded the celebrated
Alexander in the episcopate, added the following, in a letter
addressed to the Africans.
"The bishops convened in council being desirous of refuting the
impious assertions invented by the Arians, that the Son was created
out of that which was non-existent , that He is a creature and
created being , that there was a period in which He was not , and
that He is mutable by nature, and being all agreed in propounding the
following declarations, which are in accordance with the holy
Scriptures; namely, that the Son is by nature only-begotten of
God, Word, Power, and sole Wisdom of the Father; that He is,
as John said, 'the true God ,' and, as Paul has written, 'the
brightness of the glory, and the express image of the person of the
Father ,' the followers of Eusebius, drawn aside by their own vile
doctrine, then began to say one to another, Let us agree, for we are
also of God; ' There is but one God, by whom are all things ;'
'Old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new, and
all things are of Gad.' They also dwelt particularly upon what is
contained in 'The Shepherd:' 'Believe above all that there is one
God, who created and fashioned all things, and making them to be out
of that which is not.'
"But the bishops saw through their evil design and impious artifice,
and gave a clearer elucidation of the words 'of God,' and wrote,
that the Son is of the substance of God; in order that while the
creatures, which do not in any way derive their existence of or from
themselves are said to be of God, the Son alone is said to be of the
substance of the Father; this being peculiar to the only-begotten
Son, the true Word of the Father. This is the reason why the
bishops wrote, that He is of the substance of the Father.
"But when the Arians, who seemed few in number, were again
interrogated by the Bishops as to whether they admitted 'that the Son
is not a creature, but Power, and sole Wisdom, and eternal
unchangeable Image of the Father; and that He is very God,' the
Eusebians were noticed making signs to one another to shew that these
declarations were equally applicable to us. For it is said, that we
are 'the image and glory Of God;' and 'for always we who live:'
there are, also, they said, many powers; for it is written 'All
the power of God went out of the land of Egypt.' The canker-worm
and the locust are said to be 'a great power And elsewhere it is
written, 'The God of powers is with us, the God of Jacob
helper.' To which may be added that we are God's own not simply,
but because the Son called us ' brethren.' The declaration that
Christ is 'the true God' does not distress us, for, having come
into being, He is true.
"Such was the corrupt opinion of the Arians; but on this the
bishops, having detected their deceitfulness in this matter, collected
from Scripture those passages which say of Christ that He is the
glory, the fountain, the stream, and the express image of the
person; and they quoted the following words: 'In thy light we shall
see light;' and likewise, 'I and the Father are one.' They
then, with still greater clearness, briefly declared that the Son is
of one substance with the Father; for this, indeed, is the
signification of the passages which have been quoted. The complaint of
the Arians, that these precise words are not to be found in
Scripture, is proved groundless by their own practice, for their own
impious assertions are not taken from Scripture; for it is not written
that the Son is of the non-existent, and that there was a time when
He was not: and yet they complain of having been condemned by
expressions which, though not actually in Scripture, are in
accordance with true religion. They themselves, on the other hand,
as though they had found their words on a dunghill, uttered things
verily of earth. The bishops, on the contrary, did not find their
expressions for themselves; but, received their testimony from the
fathers, and wrote accordingly. Indeed, there were bishops of old
time, nearly one hundred and thirty years ago, both of the great city
of Rome and of our own city, who condemned those who asserted that the
Son is a creature, and that He is not of one substance with the
Father. Eusebius, the bishop of Caesarea, was acquainted with
these facts; he, at one time, favoured the Arian heresy, but he
afterwards signed the confession of faith of the Council of Nicaea.
He wrote to the people of his diocese, maintaining that the word
'consubstantial' was 'used by illustrious bishops and learned writers
as a term for expressing the divinity of the Father and of the
Son.'"
So these men concealed their unsoundness through fear of the majority,
and gave their assent to the decisions of the council, thus drawing
upon themselves the condemnation of the prophet, for the God of all
cries unto them," "This people honour Me with their lips, but in
their hearts they are far from Me." Theonas and Secundus,
however, did not like to take this course, and were excommunicated by
common consent as men who esteemed the Arian blasphemy above
evangelical doctrine. The bishops then returned to the council, and
drew up twenty laws to regulate the discipline of the Church.
|
|