But they had at the same time to maintain the doctrines of the Trinity
and the Divinity of Christ. They were to assert the Deity of Christ,
whom the heretics held to be a creature, and yet ascribed to him the
works of creation. It is at least natural to suppose that, to avoid
giving the heretics any advantage in popular argument, and to use
expressions importing the broadest contrast to theirs, they at first
ascribed the creation to God, without any reference to the distinction
of Persons in the Godhead; or, to maintain that doctrine at the same
time, and to meet the point in question as to the Deity of the Creator,
they ascribed the works of creation and providence to God the Father.
Whatever may have been the process, this was the result. It is not
unlikely that, at the date of the Apostles' and the Nicene Creeds, there
were many who at length joined in adopting them, who from ignorance, or
from the sway of heretical influences, were greatly confused upon these
subjects; many, more or less perverted by Gnostic and Judaizing dogmas;
many who saw no possibility of maintaining the doctrines which they held
concerning the Father, as the Father of Christ the Son by _eternal
generation_, and as the fountain of all authority and power, without
specifically ascribing to him the works of creation and providence; many
who, relying on the doctrine of the _eternal_ generation of the Son, as
the most conclusive and unanswerable proof of his Divinity, confined
their attention to that, and saw no possibility of meeting and
counteracting the dogmas of Cerinthus, or of other heretics, if they
ascribed the creation to the Son.
It must be considered that the terms which they employed were adopted
expressly to meet the growing and fatal errors which infested the
Church; and that they had, at the date of the Nicene Creed, a most
powerful motive to concession and accommodation for the sake of unity,
in the notion already prevalent concerning schism--defection from the
faith of the dominant or Catholic Church, or separation from that body
on that account--as a mortal sin.
It was pointedly to their purpose to maintain, in opposition to
Cerinthus, that the Christ was the Son of God, and the only being
designated by that title; and equally to their purpose, in opposition to
Arius, to maintain that he was not created. They were to meet these
points somehow, or accomplish nothing against the most formidable
heresies. They hit upon a phraseology which, if it be not wholly
unintelligible to mortals, was probably then deemed to be unanswerable,
in the assertion that he was the Son by _eternal generation_; begotten,
not made, &c.
The language of the creeds, hereafter more particularly referred to, is
presumed to have become gradually familiar to the opposers of heresy
before it was embodied in those formularies. They express in a condensed
form the sentiments and terms by which the leading controvertists
repelled the dominant heresies of the time.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account