Arius to Eusebius of Nicomedia (C. 318)

Arius to Eusebius of Nicomedia (C. 318)

Arius to Eusebius of Nicomedia (c. 318)

(1.) To that most beloved man of God, the faithful and orthodox Eusebius,from Arius, unjustly persecuted by father Alexander because of the all-conquering truth which you, Eusebius, also are defending!

(2.) Since my father Ammonius is going to Nicomedia, it seemed reasonable and proper to greet you through him, remembering at the same time the innate love and affection which you have for the brothers on account of God and his Christ, because the bishop [Alexander] is severely ravaging and persecuting us and moving against us with every evil. Thus he drives us out of every city like godless men, since we will not agree with his public statements: that there was “always a God, always a Son;” “as soon as the Father, so soon the Son [existed];” “with the Father co-exists the Son unbegotten, ever-begotten, begotten without begetting;” “God neither precedes the Son in aspect or in a moment of time;” “always a God, always a Son, the Son being from God himself.”

(3.) Since Eusebius, your brother in Caesarea, and Theodotus, and Paulinus, and Athanasius, and Gregory, and Aetius and all those in the East say that God pre-exists the Son without a beginning, they have been condemned, except for Philogonius and Hellenicus and Macarius, unlearned heretics some of whom say that the Son was “spewed out”, others that he was an “emanation”, still others that he was “jointly unbegotten.”(4.) We are not able to listen to these kinds of impieties, even if the heretics threaten us with ten thousand deaths. But what do we say and think and what have we previously taught and do we presently teach? -- that the Son is not unbegotten, nor a part of an unbegotten entity in any way, nor from anything in existence, but that he is subsisting in will and intention before time and before the ages, full <of grace and truth,> God, the only-begotten, unchangeable. (5.)Before he was begotten, or created, or defined, or established, he did not exist. For he was not unbegotten. But we are persecuted because we have said the Son has a beginning but God has no beginning. We are persecuted because of that and for saying he came from non-being. But we said this since he is not a portion of God nor of anything in existence. That is why we are persecuted; you know the rest.

I pray that you fare well in the Lord, remembering our tribulations, fellow-Lucianist, truly-called Eusebius [i.e. the pious one].

Translation by GLT

Confession of faith from Arius and his followers to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria (c. 320)

Ot(1.) The Priests and Deacons to Our Blessed Father and Bishop, Alexander; greetings in the Lord.

(2.) Our faith from our forefathers, which also we learned from you, Blessed Father, is this: We acknowledge One God, alone unbegotten, alone everlasting, alone without beginning, alone true, alone having immortality, alone wise, alone good, alone sovereign, judge, governor, and provider of all, unalterable and unchangeable, just and good, God of the Law and the Prophets and the New Testament; who begat an only-begotten Son before time and the ages, through whom he made both the ages [Heb 1:2] and all that was made; who begot Him not in appearance, but in reality; and that he made him subsist at his own will, unalterable and unchangeable, the perfect creature (ktisma) of God, but not as one of the creatures; offspring, but not as one of the other things begotten; (3.) nor as Valentinus pronounced that the offspring of the Father was an emanation (probolē); nor as the Manicheans taught that the offspring was a one-in-essence-portion (meros homoousion) of the Father; nor as Sabellius, dividing the Monad, speaks of a Son-Father; nor as Hieracas speaks of one torch [lit] from another, or as a lamp divided into two; nor that he who existed before was later generated or created anew into a Son, as you yourself, O blessed father, have often condemned both in church services and in council meetings; but, as we say, he was created at the will of God, before time and before the ages, and came to life and being from the Father, and the glories which coexist in him are from the Father.

(4.) For when giving to him [the Son] the inheritance of all things [Heb 1:2], the Father did not deprive himself of what he has without beginning in himself; for he is the source of all things. Thus there are three subsisting realities (hypostaseis). And God, being the cause of all that happens, is absolutely alone without beginning; but the Son, begotten apart from time by the Father, and created (ktistheis) and founded before the ages, was not in existence before his generation, but was begotten apart from time before all things, and he alone came into existence (hypestē) from the Father. For he is neither eternal nor co-eternal nor co-unbegotten with the Father, nor does he have his being together with the Father, as some speak of relations, introducing two unbegotten beginnings. But God is before all things as monad and beginning of all. Therefore he is also before the Son, as we have learned also from your public preaching in the church.

(5.) Therefore he thus has his being from God; and glories, and life, and all things have been given over to him; in this way God is his beginning. For he is over him, as his God and being before him. But if the expressions from him [Rom. 11:36] and from the womb [Ps. 109:3 (LXX), 110:3 English] and I came from the Father, and I have come [John 16:28], are understood by some to mean that he is part of him [the Father], one in essence or as an emanation, then the Father is, according to them, compounded and divisible and alterable and material, and, as far as their belief goes, the incorporeal God endures a body.

(6.) I pray that you fare well in the Lord, blessed father. Arius; the priests of Arius -- Aethales, Achilles, Carpones, and Sarmatas; the deacons Euzoios, Lucius, Julius, Menas, Helladius, and Gaius; the bishops Secundas of the Pentapolis, Theonas of Libya, and Pistus whom the Arians [later] set up [as bishop] at Alexandria.

Section 1-5: Translation from Athanasius (NPNF2 vol. 4, p. 458), adapted by GLT her translations in New Eusebius, no. 283; NPNF2 vol. 3, p. 41; ¶ 2.6-8 in Hanson, p. 139; ¶ 4-5 in Hanson, p. 6

Arius and Euzoius to the Emperor Constantine (end of 327)

Arius and Euzoïus, to our most reverent and pious lord, Emperor Constantine.

(1.) In accord with the command of your devout piety, sovereign lord, we declare our faith, and in writing profess before God that we and our adherents believe as follows:

(2.) We believe in one God the Father Almighty, and in the Lord Jesus Christ his Son, who was begotten of him before all ages, God the Word through whom all things were made, both things in heaven and on earth; who descended, and became human, and suffered, and rose again, ascended into heaven, and will again come to judge the living and the dead. (3.) We believe also in the Holy Spirit, and in the resurrection of the flesh, and in the life of the coming age, and in the kingdom of the heavens, and in one catholic church of God, extending from one end of the earth to the other. (4.) This faith we have received from the holy gospels, in which the Lord says to his disciples: “Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” If we do not so believe and do not truly receive the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as the whole catholic church and the holy Scriptures teach (in which we believe in every respect), may God judge us both now, and in the coming judgment. (5.) Wherefore we (who have been consecrated to the ministry, and hold the faith and opinions of the church and of the holy Scriptures) encourage your piety, most devout emperor, that we may be reunited to our mother, the church, by your peace-loving and devoted piety, avoiding all superfluous questions and disputes. Then both we and the whole church will be at peace and will offer in common our accustomed prayers for your tranquil reign, and also for your whole family.

Translation from Socrates (NPNF2 vol. 2, p. 28), adapted by AJW

Thalia

Thalia literally means "abundance," "good cheer," or "banquet". This work was written in verse, in order to aid memorization and popular distribution of Arius's ideas. Fragments of this work survive in two writings of his opponent Athanasius. The first is in a report of Arius' teaching in Orations Against the Arians., 1.5-6. This paraphrase has negative comments interspersed, so it is difficult to decide what are Arius's words and what are comments of Athanasius (Rowan Williams, Arius, 99).

The second is a more direct quotation in On the Councils of Arminum and Seleucia, 15. Someone other than Athanasius, perhaps even someone sympathetic to Arius, may have compiled the quotations (Hanson 10-15, esp. 12). We used this quotation as the basis of our translation.

We also have a page showing the Greek version of Thalia (side-by-side with an English translation).

The following is a translation from On the Councils of Arminum and Seleucia 15

…And so God Himself, as he really is, is inexpressible to all.
He alone has no equal, no one similar (homoios), and no one of the same glory.
We call him unbegotten, in contrast to him who by nature is begotten.
We praise him as without beginning in contrast to him who has a beginning.
We worship him as timeless, in contrast to him who in time has come to exist.

He who is without beginning made the Son a beginning of created things.
He produced him as a son for himself by begetting him.
He [the son] has none of the distinct characteristics of God’s own being (kat’ hypostasis)
For he is not equal to, nor is he of the same being (homoousios) as him.

God is wise, for he himself is the teacher of Wisdom -
Sufficient proof that God is invisible to all:
He is is invisible both to things which were made through the Son, and also to the Son himself.

I will say specifically how the invisible is seen by the Son:
by that power by which God is able to see, each according to his own measure,
the Son can bear to see the Father, as is determined

So there is a Triad, not in equal glories.
Their beings (hypostaseis) are not mixed together among themselves.
As far as their glories, one infinitely more glorious than the other.
The Father in his essence (ousia) is a foreigner to the Son, because he exists without beginning.

Understand that the Monad [eternally] was; but the Dyad was not before it came into existence.
It immediately follows that, although the Son did not exist, the Father was still God.
Hence the Son, not being [eternal] came into existence by the Father’s will,
He is the Only-begotten God, and this one is alien from [all] others

[Williams suggests a section on the Holy Spirit may have been omitted here (p. 310).]

Wisdom came to be Wisdom by the will of the Wise God.
Hence he is conceived in innumerable aspects. He is Spirit,
Power, Wisdom, God’s glory, Truth, Image, and Word.
Understand that he is also conceived of as Radiance and Light.
The one who is superior is able to beget one equal to the Son,
But not someone more important, or superior, or greater.
At God’s will the Son has the greatness and qualities that he has.
His existence from when and from whom and from then -- are all from God.
He, though strong God, praises in part (ek merous) his superior .

In brief, God is inexpressible to the Son.
For he is in himself what he is, that is, indescribable,
So that the son does not comprehend any of these things or have the understanding to explain them.
For it is impossible for him to fathom the Father, who is by himself.
For the Son himself does not even know his own essence (ousia),
For being Son, his existence is most certainly at the will of the Father.

What reasoning allows, that he who is from the Father should comprehend and know his own parent?
For clearly that which has a beginning is not able to conceive of or grasp the existence of that which has no beginning.

A recent and thorough discussion of the text, meaning, and significance ofThalia is found in Rowan Williams, Arius: Heresy and Tradition, Revised Edition, 98-116. Both the translation found there, as well as that found in Hanson, Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, 12-15, were consulted for this translation.