Trinity & Apollinarian controversy The divinity of the Holy Spirit. The doctrine of the Trinity according to the Cappadocian Fathers. The teaching of Apollinaris of Laodicea. The Second Ecumenical Council: Constantinople, 381.

Public dimension of Arian controversy The whole city is full of it [controversy], the squares, the market places, the cross-roads, the alleyways; men in old-clothes, money changers, food sellers: they are all busy arguing. If you ask someone to give you change, he philosophizes about the Begotten [Son] and the Unbegotten [Father]; if you inquire about the price of a loaf, you are told by way of reply that the Father is greater and the Son inferior; if you ask ‘Is my bath ready?’ the attendant answers that the Son was made out of nothing. Gregory of Nyssa, On the Deity of the Son (PG 46:557B).

The ‘Spirit-fighters’ Emerged in 361 Taught that the Holy Spirit was one of God’s gifts, not a divine person Opposed by the Cappadocian Fathers

Cappadocian Fathers on the Holy Spirit Holy Spirit is a person, not an impersonal force: Possible to sin against the Holy Spirit (Mt 12:31-32) Possible to grieve the Holy Spirit (Eph 4:30) Holy Spirit is divine: Sanctification as new creation Baptismal practices Mk 3 speaks of the sin against the Holy Spirit which cannot be forgiven. Much has been made speculated about the unpardonable sin. If you read this statement in the context, it means those who say that the things which Christ performs by the power of God are in fact performed by the devil. The sin against the Holy Spirit is the denial of the power of God. This sin cannot be forgiven because there can be no relationship between God who extends forgiveness and th person who consciously denies that forgiveness is being extended.   Besides, it is possible to lie against the Holy Spirit (Acts 5) and it is also possible to grieve the Holy Spirit (Eph. 4:30). "And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption." (Ephesians 4:30)

The Doctrine of the Trinity Inadequate extreme positions (heresies): 1. Modalism 2. Subordinationism (Arianism) 3. Tritheism (three gods) Orthodox definition: One essence, three persons

Subordinationism (Arianism) Unity of three persons Distinction of three persons orthodoxy Tritheism Modalism Equality of F., S. & H. S.

Who do you say that I am? What is Jesus’ relationship to God the Father? What is Jesus’ relationship to human beings?

The teaching of Apollinaris of Laodicea (310-390) Friend of Athanasius Gifted exegete and apologist Loyal to the Nicene faith: emphasized full divinity of Christ His teaching regarding humanity of Christ condemned at the council of Constantinople in 381 (to be discussed during seminar) The author of this theory, Apollinaris (Apolinarios) the Younger, Bishop of Laodicea, flourished in the latter half of the fourth century and was at first highly esteemed by men like St. Athanasius, St. Basil, and St. Jerome for his classical culture, his Biblical learning, his defence of Christianity and his loyalty to the Nicene faith. He assisted his father, Apollinaris the Elder, in reconstructing the scriptures on classical models in order to compensate the Christians for the loss of Greek literature of which the edict of Julian had deprived them. St. Jerome credits him with innumerable volumes on the Scriptures; two apologies of Christianity, one against Porphyry, and the other against Julian; a refutation of Eunomius, a radical Arian, etc.; but all these works are lost. The precise time at which Apollinaris came forward with his heresy is uncertain. There are clearly two periods in the Apollinarist controversy. Up to 376, either because of his covert attitude or of the respect in which he was held, Apollinaris's name was never mentioned by his opponents, i.e. by individuals like Athanasius and Pope Damasus, or by councils like the Alexandrian (362), and the Roman (376). From this latter date it is open war. Two more Roman councils, 377 and 381, and a number of Fathers, plainly denounce and condemn as heretical the views of Apollinaris. He failed to submit even to the more solemn condemnation of the council of Constantinople, 381, whose first canon entered Apollinarianism on the list of heresies, and he died in his error, about 392. His following, at one time considerable in Constantinople, Syria, and Phoenicia, hardly survived him. Some few disciples, like Vitalis, Valentinus, Polemon, and Timothy, tried to perpetuate the error of the master and probably are responsible for the forgeries noticed above. The sect itself soon became extinct. Towards 416, many returned to the mother-Church, while the rest drifted away into Monophysitism.

Gregory of Nazianzus (325-389) One of the Cappadocian Fathers Major defender of the doctrine of the Trinity at the council of Constantinople Argued against Apollinaris: ‘That which was not assumed was not healed.’

The Second Ecumenical Council Met in Constantinople in 381 Condemned the teaching of Apollinaris Affirmed that Christ is fully human Defined the doctrine of the Trinity

Theodosius I (346-395) makes pro-Nicene orthodoxy the only acceptable form of religion All the people who are ruled by the administration of our Clemency shall practice that religion which the divine Peter the Apostle transmitted to the Romans… It is evident that this is the religion that is followed by the Pontiff Damasus and by Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, a man of apostolic sanctity… We command that those persons who follow this rule [of trinitarian faith] shall embrace the name of Catholic Christians. The rest, however, whom we adjure demented and insane, shall sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas, their meeting places shall not receive the name of churches, and they shall be smitten first by divine vengeance and secondly by the retribution of our own initiative, which we shall assume in accordance with the divine judgment.”

Seminar questions How does Gregory formulate the fundamental dilemma involved in speaking about the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? (p. 256) What is the gist of Ablabius’ argument? (p. 256-7) What is Gregory’s initial answer to the difficulty involved? What answer would be deemed satisfactory for simple Christians? (p. 257) What does the term ‘Godhead’ refer to? (pp. 259-260) What distinguishes the actions of Father, Son & Holy Spirit from the actions of human beings? (pp. 261-62) What distinctions does Gregory admit among the persons of the Trinity? (p. 266)

Gregory of Nazianzus, Epistle 101 Who is the recipient of the letter? (consult p. 124-25). What are the main heresies about Christ that Gregory condemns? (pp. 217-218). What is Apollinaris’ position (p. 218, bottom) What is Gregory’s main objection to Apollinaris? (p. 218, 221) What two difficulties did Apollinaris see in attributing to Christ human mind? (p. 219, 220) How does Gregory respond to these difficulties? (pp. 219 & 220) According to Gregory, how does scripture use the word ‘flesh’? (pp. 221-22)).