Übersetzung ausblenden
The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret (CCEL)

Chapter VII. Confutation of Arianism deduced from the Writings of Eustathius and Athanasius.

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 ¹,’ wrote against them, and refuted their blasphemy.

²“I will now proceed to relate how these different events occurred. A general council was summoned at Nicæa, 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 ³.”

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 P. 45 desirous of refuting the impious assertions invented by the Arians, that the Son was created out of that which was non-existent ⁴, that He is a creature and created being ⁵, that there was a period in which He was not ⁶, 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 ⁷,’ and, as Paul has written, ‘the brightness of the glory, and the express image of the person of the Father ⁸,’ 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 ⁹; ‘Old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new, and all things are of God ¹⁰.’ They also dwelt particularly upon what is contained in ‘The Shepherd ¹¹:’ ‘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 ¹² 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 ¹³;’ and ‘for always we who live ¹⁴:’ there are, also, they said, many powers; for it is written—‘All the power of God went out of the land of Egypt ¹⁵.’ The canker-worm and the locust are said to be ‘a great power ¹⁶.’ And elsewhere it is written, The God of powers is with us, the God of Jacob helper ¹⁷.’ To which may be added that we are God’s own not simply, but because the Son called us ‘brethren ¹⁸.’ 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 ¹⁹;’ and likewise, ‘I and the Father are one ²⁰.’ 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 ²¹, 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 Cæsarea, 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 Nicæa. 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 ²².’”

So these men concealed their unsoundness through fear of the majority, and gave their P. 46 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 ²³.” 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.

Edition ausblenden
ΕΠΙΣΚΟΠΟΥ ΚΥΡΟΥ ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑΣΤΙΚΗΣ ΙΣΤΟΡΙΑΣ ΤΟΜΟΣ ΠΡΩΤΟΣ

ζʹ.

Τὰ κατὰ τὴν μεγάλην σύνοδον τὴν ἐν Νικαίᾳ.

Ταῦτα μαθὼν ὁ πάνσοφος βασιλεὺς πρῶτον μὲν αὐτὴν ἐπειράθη τὴν τῶν κακῶν ἐμφράξαι πηγὴν καί τινα τῶν ἐπ´ ἀγχινοίᾳ περιβοήτων εἰς τὴν Ἀλεξάνδρειαν μετὰ γραμμάτων ἀπέστειλε, σβέσαι τὴν ἔριν πειρώμενος καὶ τὸ στασιάζον συναγαγεῖν εἰς ὁμόνοιαν προσδοκῶν. Ἐπειδὴ δὲ τῆς ἐλπίδος ἐψεύσθη, τὴν πολυθρύλητον ἐκείνην εἰς τὴν Νικαέων συνήγειρε σύνοδον, δημοσίοις ὄνοις καὶ ἡμιόνοις καὶ ὀρεῦσι καὶ ἵπποις χρήσασθαι τοὺς ἐπισκόπους καὶ τοὺς σὺν τούτοις ἀφικνουμένους παρεγγυήσας. Ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἠθροίσθησαν ὅσοι τῆς ὁδοιπορίας τὸν πόνον ἐνεγκεῖν ἠδυνήθησαν, ἀφίκετο καὶ αὐτὸς εἰς τὴν Νίκαιαν, ἰδεῖν τε τὴν τῶν ἀρχιερέων πληθὺν ἐφιέμενος καὶ τὴν ὁμόνοιαν αὐτοῖς πρυτανεῦσαι ποθῶν· καὶ παραχρῆμα πάντα αὐτοῖς ἀφθόνως χορηγεῖσθαι προσέταξεν. Ὀκτωκαίδεκα δὲ καὶ τριακόσιοι συνῆλθον ἀρχιερεῖς. Ὁ δὲ τῆς Ῥώμης διὰ γῆρας ἀπελείφθη βαθύ· δύο μέντοι πρεσβυτέρους ἀπέστειλε, συνθέσθαι τοῖς πραττομένοις παρεγγυήσας.

Ἦσαν δὲ κατ´ ἐκεῖνον τὸν χρόνον πολλοὶ μὲν ἀποστολικοῖς χαρίσμασι διαπρέποντες, πολλοὶ δὲ τὰ στίγματα τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ, κατὰ τὸν θεῖον ἀπόστολον, ἐν τῷ σώματι φέροντες. Ἰάκωβος μὲν γὰρ ὁ Ἀντιοχείας τῆς Μυγδονίας (Σύροι δὲ αὐτὴν καὶ Ἀσσύριοι Νίσιβιν ὀνομάζουσι) καὶ νεκροὺς ἀνέστησε καὶ τοῖς ζῶσι συνέταξε καὶ ἄλλα μυρία εἰργάσατο θαύματα· ἃ περιττὸν ἡγοῦμαι τῇδε πάλιν ἐνθεῖναι τῇ συγγραφῇ, ἐν τῇ Φιλοθέῳ ταῦτα διηγησάμενος Ἱστορίᾳ. Παῦλος δὲ ὁ Νεοκαισαρείας (φρούριον δὲ τοῦτο ταῖς τοῦ Εὐφράτου παρακείμενον ὄχθαις) τῆς Λικιννίου παραπήλαυσε λύττης. ἄμφω γὰρ ἦν τὼ χεῖρε πεπεδημένος, σιδήρου πεπυρακτωμένου προσβαλόντος αὐταῖς καὶ τὰ κινητικὰ τῶν ἄρθρων νεῦρα συστείλαντος καὶ νεκρώσαντος. ἕτεροι δὲ ὀρωρυγμένους εἶχον τοὺς δεξιοὺς ὀφθαλμούς, ἄλλοι δὲ τὰς ἀγκύλας ἐκκεκομμένοι τὰς δεξιάς· εἷς τούτων ἦν Παφνούτιος ὁ Αἰγύπτιος· καὶ ἁπαξαπλῶς ἦν ἰδεῖν δῆμον μαρτύρων κατὰ ταὐτὸν συνηθροισμένον. Οὐκ ἦν δ´ ὅμως ἄμοιρος τῶν ἐναντίων ὁ θεῖος οὗτος καὶ ἀοίδιμος ὅμιλος· ἀλλ´ ἦσάν τινες, εὐαρίθμητοι μέν, ὕπουλοι δὲ καὶ τὰ βράχη μιμούμενοι, καὶ τὴν πονηρίαν καλύπτοντες καὶ ταῖς Ἀρείου βλασφημίαις οὐ προφανῶς συνηγοροῦντες.

Συνεληλυθότων δὲ πάντων, οἶκον μέγιστον ἐν τοῖς βασιλείοις ηὐτρέπισεν βασιλεύς, βάθρα καὶ θρόνους ὅτι μάλιστα πλείστους ἐν τούτῳ τεθῆναι κελεύσας τῷ τῶν ἀρχιερέων ἀποχρώντως συλλόγῳ. Οὕτω τὸ πρέπον αὐτοῖς εὐτρεπίσας γέρας, εἰσελθεῖν τε ἐπέτρεψε καὶ περὶ τῶν προκειμένων βουλεύσασθαι. Εἰσελήλυθε δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσχατος σὺν ὀλίγοις, ἀξιέπαινον μὲν ἔχων τὸ μέγεθος, ἀξιάγαστον δὲ τὴν ὥραν, θαυμασιωτέραν δὲ τὴν τοῖς μετώποις ἐπικαθημένην αἰδῶ. Θρόνου δὲ σμικροῦ τεθέντος ἐν μέσῳ κεκάθικεν, ἐπιτρέψαι τοῦτο τοὺς ἐπισκόπους αἰτήσας· σὺν αὐτῷ δὲ καὶ ἅπας ὁ θεῖος ἐκεῖνος ἐκαθέσθη χορός. Παραυτίκα δὲ πρῶτος ὁ μέγας Εὐστάθιος, ὁ τῆς Ἀντιοχέων ἐκκλησίας τὴν προεδρίαν λαχών (Φιλογόνιος γὰρ, οὗ πρόσθεν ἐμνήσθην, εἰς τὸν ἀμείνω μεταβεβήκει βίον, τοῦτον δὲ ἄκοντα ποιμαίνειν ἀντ´ ἐκείνου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ἐκείνην ψήφῳ κοινῇ κατηνάγκασαν ἀρχιερεῖς τε καὶ ἱερεῖς καὶ πᾶς ὁ λαὸς ὁ φιλόχριστος), οὗτος τοῖς ἄνθεσι τῶν ἐγκωμίων τὴν βασιλέως ἐστεφάνωσε κεφαλὴν καὶ τὴν περὶ τὰ θεῖα σπουδὴν εὐλογίαις ἠμείψατο. Παυσαμένου δὲ τούτου, βασιλεὺς ὁ πανεύφημος τοὺς περὶ τῆς ὁμονοίας τε καὶ συμφωνίας προσενήνοχε λόγους, τῆς τε τῶν τυράννων ἐκείνων ἀναμιμνήσκων ὠμότητος καὶ τῆς ἐπ´ αὐτοῦ θεόθεν παρασχεθείσης ἐντιμοτάτης εἰρήνης, καὶ ὡς δεινὸν εἴη καὶ ἄγαν δεινόν, τῶν πολεμίων καταλυθέντων καὶ μηδενὸς ἀντιτείνειν τολμῶντος, ἀλλήλους βάλλειν καὶ τοῖς δυσμενέσιν ἡδονὴν καὶ γέλωτα προξενεῖν, ἄλλως τε καὶ περὶ θείων διαλεγομένους πραγμάτων καὶ τοῦ παναγίου πνεύματος τὴν διδασκαλίαν ἀνάγραπτον ἔχοντας. «εὐαγγελικαὶ γάρ», φησί,

« Βίβλοι καὶ ἀποστολικαὶ καὶ τῶν παλαιῶν προφητῶν τὰ θεσπίσματα σαφῶς ἡμᾶς ἃ χρὴ περὶ τοῦ θείου φρονεῖν ἐκπαιδεύουσι. Τὴν πολεμοποιὸν οὖν ἀπελάσαντες ἔριν, ἐκ τῶν θεοπνεύστων λόγων λάβωμεν τῶν ζητουμένων τὴν λύσιν».

Ταῦτα καὶ τὰ τούτοις παραπλήσια, οἷα δὴ παῖς φιλοπάτωρ, τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν ὡς πατράσι προσέφερε, τῶν ἀποστολικῶν δογμάτων τὴν συμφωνίαν πραγματευόμενος. Τῆς δὲ συνόδου τὸ μὲν πλεῖστον τοῖς λεγομένοις ἐπείθετο καὶ τήν τε πρὸς ἀλλήλους ὁμόνοιαν τήν τε τῶν δογμάτων ὑγείαν ἠσπάζετο· ὀλίγοι δέ τινες, ὧν καὶ πρόσθεν ἐμνήσθην, καὶ πρὸς ἐκείνοις Μηνόφαντος ὁ Ἐφέσιος καὶ ὁ Σκυθοπολίτης Πατρόφιλος Θεογόνιός τε Νικαίας αὐτῆς ἐπίσκοπος ὢν καὶ ὁ Νερωνιάδος Νάρκισσος (Κιλικίας δὲ τῆς δευτέρας ἡ Νερωνιάς ἐστι πόλις ἣν νῦν Εἰρηνούπολιν ὀνομάζομεν), καὶ μετὰ τούτων Θεωνᾶς ὁ Μαρμαρικῆς καὶ ὁ Πτολεμαΐδος τῆς Αἰγυπτίας Σεκοῦνδος τοῖς ἀποστολικοῖς ἀντέλεγον δόγμασιν, Ἀρείῳ συνηγοροῦντες. Ὑπαγορεύσαντες δὲ καὶ πίστεως διδασκαλίαν ἐπέδοσαν τῷ κοινῷ· ἣν ἀναγνωσθεῖσαν εὐθέως διέρρηξαν ἅπαντες, νόθον καὶ κίβδηλον ὀνομάσαντες. Θορύβου δὲ πλείστου κατ´ αὐτῶν γενομένου καὶ πάντων προδοσίαν αὐτῶν τῆς εὐσεβείας κατηγορούντων, δείσαντες ἐξανέστησαν καὶ πρῶτοι τὸν Ἄρειον ἀπεκήρυξαν, πλὴν Σεκούνδου καὶ Θεωνᾶ. Οὕτω δὲ τοῦ δυσσεβοῦς ἐκποδὼν γενομένου, συμφώνως ἅπαντες τὴν μέχρι καὶ νῦν ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις πολιτευομένην πίστιν ὑπαγορεύσαντες καὶ ταῖς ὑπογραφαῖς βεβαιώσαντες διέλυσαν τὸ συνέδριον.

Ὑπούλως μέντοι καὶ οὐκ εἰλικρινῶς οἱ προρρηθέντες τῇδε τῇ πίστει συνέθεντο. Καὶ μαρτυρεῖ τά τε ὕστερον παρ´ αὐτῶν τυρευθέντα κατὰ τῶν τῆς εὐσεβείας προμάχων καὶ τὰ παρ´ αὐτῶν ἐκείνων περὶ αὐτῶν συγγραφέντα. Εὐστάθιος μὲν γὰρ ἐκεῖνος ὁ τῆς Ἀντιοχέων ἐπίσκοπος, οὗ καὶ πρόσθεν ἐμνήσθην, ταῦτα περὶ αὐτῶν ἔγραψε, τά τε γεγενημένα διδάσκων καὶ τὴν βλασφημίαν ἐλέγχων καὶ τὴν παροιμιακὴν ἑρμηνεύων ῥῆσιν· «κύριος ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ».