Translation
Hide
De Decretis or Defence of the Nicene Definition
15. Proof of the Catholic Sense of the Word Son .Power, Word or Reason, and Wisdom, the names of the Son, imply eternity; as well as the Father’s title of Fountain. The Arians reply, that these do not formally belong to the essence of the Son, but are names given Him; that God has many words, powers, &c. Why there is but one Son and Word, &c. All the titles of the Son coincide in Him.
This then is quite enough to expose the infamy of the Arian heresy; for, as the Lord has granted, out of their own words is irreligion brought home to them 1. But come now and let us on our part act on the offensive, and call on them for an answer; for now is fair time, when their own ground has failed them, to question them on ours; perhaps it may abash the perverse, and disclose to them whence they have fallen. We have learned from divine Scripture, that the Son of God, as was said above, is the very Word and Wisdom of the Father. For the Apostle says, ‘Christ the power of God and the Wisdom of God 2;’ and John after saying, ‘And the Word was made flesh,’ at once adds, ‘And we saw His glory, the glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth 3,’ so that, the Word being the Only-begotten Son, in this Word and in Wisdom heaven and earth and all that is therein were made. And of this Wisdom that God is Fountain we have learned from 4 Baruch, by Israel’s being charged with having forsaken the Fountain of Wisdom. If then they deny Scripture, they are at once aliens to their name, and may fitly be called of all men atheists 5, and Christ’s enemies, for they have brought upon themselves these names. But if they agree with us that the sayings of Scripture are divinely inspired, let them dare to say openly what they think in secret that God was once wordless and wisdomless 6; and P. 160 let them in their madness 7 say, ‘There was once when He was not,’ and, ‘before His generation, Christ was not 8;’ and again let them declare that the Fountain begat not Wisdom from itself, but acquired it from without, till they have the daring to say, ‘The Son came of nothing;’ whence it will follow that there is no longer a Fountain, but a sort of pool, as if receiving water from without, and usurping the name of Fountain 9.
-
The main argument of the Arians was that our lord was a Son, andthereforewas not eternal, but of a substance which had a beginning. [Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) a.] Accordingly Athanasius says, ‘Having argued with them as to the meaning of their own selected term “Son,” let us go on to others, which on the very face make for us, such as Word, Wisdom, &c.’ ↩
-
1 Cor. i. 24 . ↩
-
John i. 14 . ↩
-
Vid. supr. §12. ↩
-
Vid. supr. §1. note 2, bis. ↩
-
ἄλογος, ἄσοφος . Vid. infr., §26. This is a frequent argument in the controversy, viz. that to deprive the Father of His Son or substantial Word ( λόγος ), is as great a sacrilege as to deny His Reason, λόγος , from which the Son receives His name. ThusOrat.i. §14. fin. Athan. says, ‘imputing to God’s nature an absence of His Word ( ἀλογίαν or irrationality), they are most irreligious.’ Vid. §19. fin. 24. Elsewhere, he says, ‘Is a man not mad himself, who even entertains the thought that God is word-less and wisdom-less? for such illustrations and such images Scripture hath proposed, that, considering the inability of human nature to comprehend concerning God, we might even from these, however poorly and dimly, discern as far as is attainable.’Orat.ii. 32. vid. also iii. 63. iv. 12.Serap.ii. 2. ↩
-
Vid. above, §1, note 6. ↩
-
These were among the original positions of the Arians; for the former, see above, note 1; the latter is one of those specified in the Nicene Anathema. ↩
-
And so πηγὴ ξηρά .Serap.ii. 2.Orat.i. §14 fin. also ii. §2, where Athanasius speaks as if those who deny that Almighty God is Father, cannot really believe in Him as a Creator. If the divine substance be not fruitful ( καρπογόνος ), but barren, as they say, as a light which enlightens not, and a dry fountain, are they not ashamed to maintain that He possesses the creative energy?’ Vid. also πηγὴ θεότητος , Pseudo-Dion.Div. Nom.c. 2. πηγὴ ἐκ πηγῆς , of the Son, Epiphan.Ancor.19. And Cyril, ‘If thou take from God His being Father, thou wilt deny the generative power ( καρπογόνον ) of the divine nature so that It no longer isperfect.This then is a token of its perfection, and the Son who went forth from Him apart from time, is a pledge ( σφραγίς ) to the Father that He is perfect.’Thesaur.p. 37. ↩
Translation
Hide
Über die Beschlüsse der Synode von Nizäa (BKV)
15.
Dieses nun ist zwar hinlänglich, um die Ketzerei der Arianer zu brandmarken; denn wir haben ihre Gottlosigkeit aus ihren eigenen Worten, wozu uns der Herr seine Gnade verlieh, deutlich erwiesen. Doch wohlan, auch wir wollen Fragen vorlegen, und sie auffordern zu antworten. Denn da sie bei ihren eigenen Beweisen in Verlegenheit kommen, so ist es wohl Zeit, daß sie nun von uns gefragt werden; denn vielleicht werden sie so in sich kehren und dahin aufblicken, von wo sie, die Thoren, herabgefallen sind. Was den Sohn Gottes betrifft, so haben wir, wie oben gesagt wurde, aus den göttlichen Schriften ersehen, daß er das Wort und die Weisheit des Vaters ist; denn der Apostel sagt:1 „Christus Gottes Kraft und Gottes Weisheit.“ Johannes aber setzte, nachdem er gesagt hatte:2 „Und das Wort ist Fleisch geworden,“ sogleich bei: „Und wir sahen seine S. 211 Herrlichkeit, eine Herrlichkeit, wie sie der Eingeborne des Vaters hat, voll Gnade und Wahrheit.“ Da nämlich das Wort der eingeborne Sohn ist, so sind in diesem Worte und in dieser Weisheit Himmel und Erde und alle Dinge in ihnen gemacht worden. Und daß die Quelle dieser Weisheit Gott sey, ersehen wir bei Baruch3, wo nämlich Israel der Vorwurf gemacht wird, daß es die Quelle der Weisheit verlassen habe. Läugnen sie also das, was geschrieben steht; so sind sie wirklich auch ihres Namens unwürdig, und sollen eigentlich von allen Gottlose und Christi Feinde genannt werden; denn so haben sie sich selbst genannt. Stimmen sie uns aber hierin bei, daß die Worte der Schrift auf göttliche Eingebung niedergeschrieben wurden, so sollen sie sich erkühnen, offen ihre versteckte Meinung an den Tag zu legen, daß nämlich Gott einmal ohne Vernunft und Weisheit gewesen sey, und sie sollen in ihrer Raserei sagen: Es war eine Zeit, wo er nicht war, und Christus war nicht, ehe er gezeugt wurde. Sie sollen ferner erklären, die Quelle habe nicht aus sich selbst die Weisheit gezeugt, sondern diese ausser sich gehabt, so daß sie sich auch zu sagen erfrechen können: Der Sohn ist aus Nichts gemacht worden. Denn dieses zeigt an, daß es keine Quelle, sondern eine Art Wasserbehälter sey, der gleichsam das Wasser von Aussen erhält, und sich den Namen der Quelle anmasset.
