Toy hagioy Athanasioy kata areianon logoi. The orations of St. Athanasius against the Arians according to the Benedictine text, with an account of his life by William Bright

81쪽

sinished in is ear A. D. 356 hi inpolog to Constantius '

a vork inicit he had sor soni time in hanci, and whicla hestilliope tot able in belle clays, o desive in the em peror' spresence He aster vard me the taunts of o vardice directed against in by Leontius, George, Narcissus, and ther Arians,

P. 132.

Throughout inis Apolora lae a id resses Constantius vii in sorm ofloyal respect This vas necessary, is it vas everrioae actuali presented; and he manliave force himself, even a stis time, to hope that Constantius migiat amen his conduci. Stilicit iva goin rathe far to tali o Constantius' 'vell-known benignit 3 c. 32 his metties to variis his relatives are reserae to in Hist Ari 69 . ut Athanasius neve asterivariis spolce of hini in his tone. Se De Fuga, 6 Hist Ari. 7 les n. 55. He dici indeed even in Hist Ara. 69, malae allo vanc for his imbecile credulity. vhicli made hini a too in the and of vors naen. See HiStorical Vntings oscit Athanasius, Introd. p. lxiii.

82쪽

precepi and Xample os Christ, an on the conductis eminent sabinis, Biblica an ecclesiaStica enlarin at the Sarne timeon the fur os the persecution, an reserring to the banishment of orthodox dishops This reatis is remaricatae Scondem ning al)SOlutei the principi os persecution*, and stating

identical vitii that os Dionysius and of γ prian, h,ut vas diScusse an accepte With certain limitations γ Augustine inone of his ast letters To e same perio laetono the duellerto e Montis', missi the rian Histor no no v extant Sa Whole), Whicli it introduces, an as to vhicli it is disticuli

of his death, the etails of vhicla he had earne stoni his presbyter Macarius, while he himself vas resident a Tnerq;

De Fus 1, 23 CL Hist Ari 67. In this letterae sayche has complied vi in ei requeS sor an account of the persecutio an a refutation o Arianism. The restitation is dentisied by the Bollandis Lis xvii in Orations: Montisiacon vi Neu manthini it is lost. The date of in Arian Histor is theae inning os 358. It is xviitte generali in the third person but the P, person occursi C. 7, 9, 15, C. See speciali 6 h in c. 5 is in text be no cornipi,'

calicit St. Athanase, p. 196) see Hist. Vntings of St. Ainan ius, P. t XXVii. Neander iv. 58 E. r. Nautes Athanasius for imputin deception to Arius in regard to in prosession os belles vllicli he had ten tered to Constantine. ut is the statenient in his letter be triae, he reali dici say that

83쪽

liave since unite in belaal of the Divinit of the Vord y; andalthough it cannot be dented that in orne etails of thei argu

the lose reaSoning vhicli Photius and ther Uriters have Sojusti admire in Amanasius is occasionalty embellislied a metast of that age uould consider, by ornas os polemicat oratory rilicia hardi recommen it to us, et ali candid readers vili appreciate the ricliness, uiness, and versatilit of the Scriptura exegeSi S the Steady gra S O certain primar truth S, and

to Athan ad p. Eg. 18, he old Constantine stat he had neve hel orta lit inermis inani profession, couche in Scriptura ivor is, containest eander says, Athanasius hadiso right to assume that Arius musttalceoliose vord tis 1 himself did. ut the oin is that Constantine uould naturali talce them in a Sense Nilich, at least, va no that condemne a Nicaea.

Excellentiam Vecti tui, quam beatus Athanasius Sseruit.' Parisian Brevia , Collec forma a. Seeip. aye o Counci os Nicaea, P. 279. Cf. Orat. i. 57, i. 6, 9, 5o iv. 47, 59 65 iv. 28, c. OccaSionali a textri as undul pressed, S

84쪽

an no externa to hirny; me heen penetration vitti vhicli Arian Objections are analysed ' Arian imputation disclairnei

Arian logicorace to iis conclusion Sy, and Arianism ho vn ob inconsistent , irreverent , prosessedi Zealou sor Monothe-iSm 3 et in a certain sense Dillae istic δ' the incidental exposureos earlier herestes; like that os Paulis Samosata V ine distinct δ' and luminous protests by anticipation a ainst later hereSies, lihe me Nestorian and Eutychiam; and me Solem eariae Sine SS vitti vhicli the orthodo conclusion are Xhibite a ministering to the deepest need of me Christi an ovi V. The work is

85쪽

ve find laighly suggestive language on the relationis ita Spiritto the Son the purpor of the terans Son anx Vord respectively' on ille dignit of the Virgin Mollier a. Theotocos 'o the question of the necessity of the Incarnation , o the

good sense ead hini practicali to acquiesce in the alter Τ'. He is ea ly a sertile in illustrations as in his avo earliest vori syy. The phraseolog includes logical or ther philosophica ternis the vord iusia is repeatedly used, qab postasiS'

86쪽

occurs cis sor ste mos part avoided in these discourses V u linea good senseri repeatedly ut hic in essen ce', or alto-o ether like Vir even Thest, and use is made of the phras, exactimage ',' clearly in orde to conciliat me Semi-arians and attractinem to vard Catholicism Anxit is ver evident, o the face of the rations stat the reat idea xvlaich filis their uriter'smin is indeperulent of an terans vilicia e na borro v stomcurrent philosopla in orde to indicate and s3mbolige What cannelther be comprehende nor Xpressed7. He has no madet himself an objecti belles out os the residue of a technical terminolo ; ii sucta phrases as issence' Subsistence' vere proscribe l, me doctrine of the Fallae and therion, as heconceives of it, as his thought lives in it, uould be sor in just viter it is vlisse an indefinite multiplicationi stac phrases

can ut se it 'in pari, is that doctrine a presente in thesimple lan uage of the postles an Evangelisis it is to secure and en rce me sui significance of mei state menis that he no v vntes e Grations,' a. in his mul hae ad ar ue at

Nicaea.

The Flast ration bes ins δ' vitii an expositionis the greatness

87쪽

os the hi estion atrissiae, risi a rea Son os God o no λ' expose by ample quotation the offensi venes of the original Arian eo , and proceed to proos os the Son' eternity andiancreate iness, dra vn mmmis Scriptura tities, Dorn the lactos His Sonship stoin the de of the Trinity, and Dona ther Scriptura phrases then to a discussionis objections Some os

inucii urged by Arians in the .XX. Version, Prov. viii. 2 2 vhicli is explainex laboriousty and innaturassy, verantist admit)o ou Lord' Mediatoria appotniment at His Incarnation. The Third y explain texis in me Gospeis, Such as Iolan iV. Io, XVii. 7, X. 3O- Where, it i Urged a mora unituis inadequate)and thos texis Whicli ascribe to the Son in limitations and affections os humanit' Is in a se v passage of the rations ste realhuman conditions osthe Incaritation seem insuffciently recognised, that desectris amen de Lin this more Systematic presentatio of the

Chris of the Church, as unitins in Himself true Godhead and

tria Mania ood' and the ratio the sonae vita abrupti turnSto noster Arian statem ent, that the Sonstat ivas a reSult os God' mere vili , Whicli vas in effect equivalent to callin the

I bes in by lxvelling on the doctrine of the Coinheren e for Whichse alS i. I. The genera viei talcen in inis discoune, o Main xlii. 32, is stat in Son qndisian in His state of humiliation, assumed a limitationos lino viedge, a He assume a capacit of suffering Whil in His Divine natur He vas allice impassibi and omni scient. Onit. i. 29-35, I, 5 I. Orat. H. 58-67, placed in Ast. Treat. d. inster Orat. i. 29; P. Oiat.

88쪽

si a Ne Vman, ArianS, P. I Neander iv. 65, E. T. Comp. Di ibunus, de Trin. i. 9. Newman in Athan. Treat. H. 5o2. He regard Athanasius arguments,or ather head se argument, o the identit of the 'Vores vi in the Son,&c., a levelle against vhat was hel by Marcellus o his solaool. p. Orat. i. 28, and the remari on ines Vord a not meret attered, ib. E. 35. The si se of this so-calle Fourili ration in sonae places Effers stoin stat

Oration.

89쪽

might be called Marcelliani sui. Nor id e even nam Photinus, the disciple os Marcellus, Iuliose simila speculations adnaade immo hi noXiolis to the belle Semi-arians It ima besel b reader Who have no bias against the ineolog of the Orations,' that this tenderiaeSs to vard an id associale vhich ve hali se Athanasius exhibitin on another occasion is instri hin contrast vim the Xuberance of objurgation hie sto velon Amans in Ina limen' o sanatic s), an es of God ames o Christ. But, o to urge that the Murtia centur hadno stablistae rules of controversia politeness, and that theacerbit os Greel disputation and the perSonalitie O Rona an societ had osten to naucla influenc on the tone of Christian

90쪽

that he had Vspent his strengili sor nought. in a cause Whicli his laith tol himaad incit at the elements of ultimate victory. In ille naidsti a discussion in one of his rations his in varii experien e brealis sonti here Christ is, reliat ear o What clanger an Stili remain δῖ' An the spirat in xxhich he had

to Serapion, o Thinuis his Heny belove an longe sor, of

vhicli the secon&bnest repea ted the ea ching of the Discourses, viaile the thers vere directe against a theor then reportexto hin by Serapion a Springing p, an aster vard kno v a. SMacedonianism; vhicli abandoning the Arian pOSitio in re ardio the Son, Strove vitii singula inconsistenc to retain it in regar to the Spirit, vhon it declare to e either a Divine Person nor a Divine attribute, but a ministerin creature, dissering oni in degre frona the angelS M. Athanasius me this error

by contending sor in Trinit reat, ternat, an undivided, in Khicli the Spint vas include With the ather and the Son; an replied to the potiate cavit Whicli, in the eristic style os