Chapter 1. Introduction. Reason for writing; certain personsindifferent about Arianism; Ariansnot Christians, because sectaries always take the name of their. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters Four Discourses Against the Arians. Reason for writing; certain persons indifferent about Arianism; Arians not .. These Orations and Discourses seem written to shew the vital importance of the. Look Inside The Orations of St Athanasius Against the Arians Although Arianism was condemned as heretical at the Council of Nicaea in , it continued to.
|Published (Last):||1 September 2011|
|PDF File Size:||13.60 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.40 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
And so undoubtedly it may decrease on the contrary, for what is added plainly admits of being subtracted.
Discourse 1 Against the Arians
Idly then have the foolish ones devised this objection also, wishing to separate the Image againsf the Fatherthat they might level the Son with things originated. If then henceforward openly adopting Caiaphas’s way, they have determined on judaizing, and are ignorant of the text, that verily God shall dwell upon the earthlet them not inquire into the Apostolical sayings; for this is not the manner of Jews. Arius, denying the Son, and reckoning Him among the creatures.
And what grace did He receive who is the Giver of arianx Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.
For if He received what He had as a reward of His purpose, and would not have had it, unless He had needed it, and had His work to show for it, then having gained it from virtue and promotion, with reason had He ‘therefore’ been called Son and Godwithout being very Son. And this thought commends itself strongly to the right-minded. What a load of extravagance!
However, there is another way in which one might remark upon it, giving the same sense in a parallel way; viz.
For if, being GodHe became man, and descending from on high He is still said to be exalted, where is He exalted, being God?
Radiance, and, a Subsistence existing, there be of it the entire Expression, and, a Father existing, there be His Truth viz. For He seems Himself not to have promoted the agaiinst at all, but rather to have been Himself promoted through it, if, according to their perverseness, He was then exalted and called Son, when He became man. Perhaps on seeing the counter absurdities which beset themselves, they may cease to fight against the truth.
And, if He be not one of the allit is sin to say concerning Him, ‘He was not,’ and ‘He was not before His generation. Enough was said above to show oations the offspring from God is not an affection; and now it has been shown in particular that the Word is not begotten according to affection. Let them contemplate then the grace which is through againsst Sonand let them acknowledge the witness which He gives even from His works, that Athanaskus is other than things originated, and alone the very Son in the Father and the Father in Him.
But if God be not as man, as He is not, we must not impute to Him the attributes of man. Or why is it that, on hearing that God has a Son, they deny Him by the parallel of themselves; whereas, if they hear that He creates and makes, no longer do they object their human ideas? For other things, according to the nature of things originate, are without likeness in essence with the Maker; but are external to Him, made by the Word at His grace and will, and thus admit of ceasing to be, if it so pleases Him who made wthanasius ; for such is the nature of things originate.
But if for preferment-sake, and the lucre of avarice which followsand the desire for good repute, they venture not on denying the text, ‘The Word was made flesh ,’ since so it is written, either let them rightly interpret the words of Scripture, of the embodied presence of the Saviouror, if they deny their sense, let them deny that the Lord became man at all. Or how is He exalted, being before His exaltation the Most High? In this difficulty, you can but answer, that there was a time when the Word was not; for your very adverb ‘once’ naturally signifies this.
For they have often expressed this sentiment, but it is not the faith of Christians ; as not declaring that He is truly Word and Son of Godor that the wisdom intended is true Wisdom. So too Meletius, when ejected by Peter the Bishop and Martyr, called his party no longer Christiansbut Meletiansand so in consequence when Alexander of blessed memory had cast out Ariusthose who remained with Alexander, remained Lrations ; but those who went out with Ariusleft the Saviour’s Name to us who were with Alexander, and as to them they were hence-forward denominated Arians.
Moreover, they will pass judgment on themselves in attributing such things to Godif, as they questioned women on the subject of time, so they inquire of the sun concerning its radiance, and of the fountain concerning its issue. Therefore it is the Father that He partakes; for this only remains to say.
CHURCH FATHERS: Four Discourses Against the Arians (Athanasius)
And let these contentious men knowthat they fail in this their perverse purpose; let them know that Paul does not signify that His essence has become, knowingas he did, that He is Son and Wisdom and Radiance and Image of the Father; but here too he refers the word ‘become’ to the ministry of that covenant, in which death which once ruled is abolished.
In both respects he has said of Him, ‘God has highly exalted Him,’ and ‘God has given to Him;’ that herein moreover he may show that it is not the Father that has become flesh, but it is His Word, who has become man, and receives after the manner of men from the Fatherand is exalted by Him, as has been said.
For what has been said, ‘They shall perish,’ is said, not as if the creation were destined for destruction, but to express the nature of things originate by the issue to which they tend. And He, on the other hand, if now promoted, how did He before rejoice in the presence of the Father? If then for our sake He sanctifies Himself, and does this when He has become man, it is very plain that the Spirit’s descent on Him in Jordan was a descent upon us, because of His bearing our body.
Through whom then and from whom behooved it that the Spirit should be given but through the Sonwhose also the Spirit is? Such thoughts then being evidently unseemly and untrue, we are driven to say that what is from the essence of the Fatherand proper to Him, is entirely the Son; for it is all one to say that God is wholly participated, and that He begets; and what does begetting signify but a Son?
This being so understood, it is parallel also respecting the Sonthat whatever, and however often, is said, such as, ‘He became’ and ‘become,’ should ever have the same sense: They had best have been silent; but since it is otherwise, it remains to meet their shameless question with a bold retort.
Who at such blasphemies is not transported? If then the Father change, let the Image change; for so is the Image and Radiance in its relation towards Him who begot It. For wherefore a Son, if not from Him?
For he, earnest as he is in his advocacy of the Arian heresyand maintaining that the Unoriginate is one, runs counter to them in saying, that the Wisdom of God is unoriginate and without beginning also. For had they zthanasius the person, and the subject, and the season of the Apostle’s words, they would not have expounded of Christ’s divinity what belongs to His manhood, nor in their folly have committed so great an act of irreligion. Moreover the usage of men recognises this, and every one will confess its propriety.
About this page Source. Or why blaspheme the Word as after times, by whom even the ages were made?