|
HOME | GREEK LANGUAGE | LIBRARIES | BLOG | HELP | SEARCH | FREEWARE | BOOKSTORE |
|
|
|
|
|
Alexander Schmemann
2. The Triumph Of Christianity (27 pages)
From Schmemann's A History of the Orthodox ChurchPage 13
Countermeasures in the East.
The East responded by holding a great council, which met in Antioch in the summer of 341 to dedicate the “Great Golden Church” that Constantine had not been able to finish before his death. About a hundred bishops attended. Nothing shows better that Church history cannot be reduced to black and white formulas than the fact that this council, which again condemned Athanasius, has still remained in the tradition of the Eastern Church one of the authoritative “local councils” and the canons it adopted are still included in the canonical collections.
The Council of Antioch of 341 was the breaking point in the Arian rebellion. The Eusebians wanted no theological disputes but simply the destruction of the defenders of homoousion. But now it was necessary to answer the Western accusation of heresy in specifically theological fashion. By returning to theology for the first time since Nicaea, the Eastern bishops started down the road, which would bring them after decades of tormenting distortions to a deliberate acceptance of that council’s decisions.
In answer to the accusation of the pope, the Fathers at the council solemnly affirmed an old pre-Nicene creed, which has been ascribed to Lucian of Antioch, in which faith in Jesus Christ is expressed in the following terms: “God of God, the Whole of the Whole, the One of the One, the Perfect of the Perfect, the King of the King . . . Non-distinct image of the Divinity of the Father, both of His Being and of His strength, will, and glory.” This was an antiquated form of the pre-Nicene doctrine about the same homoousion (“consubstantiality”) in older verbal garments. Their agreement with homoousion was not apparent to the Antiochene Fathers, nor did they perceive that only the Nicene definition expressed finally and with utmost precision what they were describing in so many images: the perfect divinity of the Son and His perfect unity with the Father. On the contrary, homoousion seemed to them an alien and dangerous term, and they found confirmation of their fears in the heresy of Marcellus of Ancyra, who had returned to the Sabellian confusion of the Son with the Father. Yet Rome had accepted Marcellus. Thus we cannot speak of a struggle between the orthodox West and the heretical East. There were too many factors on both sides of misunderstanding and incomprehension. Much had to be burned away in the purifying fire of suffering and division.
The Council of Antioch seemed to make possible a theological agreement with the West. But there remained the Problem of individuals — of Athanasius first of all. Under the pressure of the Emperor Constans, still in power in the West, it was decided to review his case at an ecumenical council in Sardica (Sofia). This council, in turn, had hardly convened in 343 when it immediately split — again because the Westerners did not comprehend the complexities of the situation. The Easterners agreed to a general review of Athanasius’ case, but before the review they regarded him as deposed and insisted that he be absent during the discussion. The Westerners refused to fulfill this condition, referring to Rome’s justification of him.
The Council split, and the peace overtures that had been made were nullified.
Cf. Books for getting closer to Orthodox Christianity ||| Orthodox Images of the Christ ||| Byzantium : The Alternative History of Europe ||| Greek Orthodoxy - From Apostolic Times to the Present Day ||| A History of the Byzantine Empire ||| Videos about Byzantium and Orthodoxy ||| Aspects of Byzantium in Modern Popular Music ||| 3 Posts on the Fall of Byzantium ||| Greek Literature / The New Testament
|
|
Reference address : https://ellopos.net/elpenor/schmemann-orthodoxy-2-triumph.asp?pg=13
