教會史 第 1 章 第 3/18 段

To the holy and great, by the grace of God, church of the Alexandrians, and to the beloved brethren throughout Egypt, Libya, and the Pentapolis: the bishops assembled at Nicaea, constituting the great and holy council, greeting in the Lord.

Since, by the grace of God and of the most God-beloved emperor Constantine, who gathered us together from various provinces and cities, the great and holy council was convened at Nicaea, it seemed necessary to the entire sacred council that a letter also be sent to you, so that you might know both what matters were raised and examined, and what was resolved and confirmed.

First was examined the impiety of Arius before our most God-beloved emperor Constantine, and it was resolved by unanimous vote that his impious opinion be anathematized, together with his words and his blasphemous thoughts, which he used in blaspheming the Son of God — saying that he is out of things that are not, that before he was begotten he was not, that there was a time when he was not, and that the Son of God possesses a free will capable of either vice or virtue.

All these things the holy synod anathematized, not enduring even so much as to hear that impious opinion, that madness, and those blasphemous words.

As for what end befell him in his own case, you have either heard already or will hear, lest we should seem to be trampling upon a man who has received a fitting recompense for his own sin.

So great was the strength of his impiety that it also swept along with him Theonas of Marmarica and Secundus of Ptolemais;

for they too have met with the very same fate.

But since the grace of God has freed Egypt from that ill opinion and blasphemy, and from those persons who dared to cause division and separation among the people who had long lived in peace, while there still remained the matter of the rashness of Meletius and of those ordained by him, we make known to you, beloved brethren, what has seemed good to the synod concerning this.

It was decided, then — the synod having dealt with him more leniently, for by strict reckoning he deserved no pardon — that Meletius should remain in his own city, and have no authority to appoint clergy or to lay on hands, nor to appear in any district or city for this purpose, but should retain only the bare title of his rank;

and that those appointed by him, having been confirmed by a more mystical ordination, should be received into communion on these terms: that they retain their rank and minister, but rank second in every case to those examined and previously ordained in each parish and church by our most honored fellow-minister Alexander;

so that these should have no authority to appoint or put forward a candidate of their own liking, or in general to do anything at all apart from the judgment of the bishop of the catholic and apostolic church who is under Alexander;

but that those who, by the grace of God and your prayers, have been found in no schism whatsoever, but stand blameless within the catholic and apostolic church, should have authority to appoint and to put forward the names of those worthy of the clergy, and in general to do everything according to the law and ordinance of the church.

But should it happen that any of those in the church fall asleep, then those who have recently been received should succeed to the honor of the deceased, provided only that they appear worthy and the people choose them, the bishop of the catholic church of Alexandria joining in the vote and setting his seal upon it.

This indeed was granted to all the rest;

but in the case of Meletius' own person it was no longer thought fitting, on account of his longstanding disorderliness and the rashness and impetuosity of his temper, that any authority of independent action should be granted him, being a man capable of causing the very same disorders again.

These are the special matters peculiar to Egypt and to the most holy church of Alexandria.

But if anything else has been enacted as a canon or decreed, our lord and most honored fellow-minister and brother Alexander, being himself present, will report it in person, since he is indeed both lord and partaker of what has taken place.

Easter — to be kept henceforth together with you.

Rejoicing then in these achievements, and in the common peace and concord, and in the fact that every heresy has been cut off, receive with greater honor and fuller love our fellow-minister — and your own bishop — Alexander, who has gladdened us by his presence, and who at his age has undergone so great a labor for the sake of establishing peace among you.

Pray also for us all, that the things which have seemed good may remain steadfast through our Lord Jesus Christ, having come about, as we believe, according to the good pleasure of God the Father, in the Holy Spirit;

to whom be the glory unto the ages of ages, amen.

the Trinity, consubstantial and eternal. Such, then, was the remedy which that divine assembly of high priests applied to the malady of Meletius.

Yet remnants of that man's derangement have persisted even to this very day;

and there are, in those very regions, certain communities of monks who submit to none of the sound doctrines, and who follow, in their manner of life, certain vain practices agreeing with the derangement of mind of the Samaritans and the Jews.

And the great emperor also wrote, informing those bishops who had not been able to attend of what had been done;

and I have thought it worthwhile to insert this letter as well into my history, since it clearly demonstrates the God-loving disposition of the soul of him who wrote it.

Constantine Augustus, to the churches.

Having learned by experience, from the prosperity of public affairs, how great is the grace that naturally proceeds from the divine power, I judged that this, above all things, ought to be the aim proper to me: that among the most blessed multitudes of the catholic church one faith, sincere love, and a piety united in mind concerning almighty God should be maintained.

But since this could not otherwise attain a firm and steadfast order, unless — all the bishops, or at least the majority of them, coming together in one place — a discernment should be made concerning each of the matters pertaining to our most holy religion; for this reason, when a very great number had assembled together (and I myself too was present, as one of yourselves — for I would not deny, indeed it is the very thing in which I most rejoice, that I have become your fellow-servant) — everything up to this point has received the examination that was fitting, until the judgment pleasing to God, the overseer of all, was brought to light for the harmony of unity, so that nothing further remains for discord or dispute concerning the faith.

There, moreover, a question having arisen concerning the most holy day of Easter, it was decided by common consent to be good that all, everywhere, should celebrate it on one and the same day.

For what could be more excellent for us, or more venerable, than that this feast — from which we have received the hope of immortality — should be observed by all, without fail, in one order and by a manifest reckoning? And first of all it seemed unworthy that this most holy feast should be kept by following the custom of the Jews, who, having defiled their own hands with a lawless crime, are, as is fitting, blinded in their polluted souls — wretches that they are.

For it is possible, that nation being cast aside, [to keep the feast] by a more accurate order...

which we have observed from the first day of the passion until the present, and that the completion of this observance should continue on into the ages to come.

Let us therefore have nothing in common with that most hostile rabble of the Jews;

for we have received from the Savior another way;

there lies open before our most sacred religion a course that is both lawful and fitting.

Agreeing together on this with one accord, let us withdraw ourselves, most honored brethren, from that shameful complicity of conscience.

For it is indeed most absurd for them to boast that, apart from their instruction, we would not be capable of observing these things.

And what right thinking could those men be capable of who, after that murder of the Lord, having lost their senses, are driven not by any reasoning but by an unrestrainable impulse, wherever their inborn madness drags them? Hence, then, in this matter too they fail to see the truth, so that, being for the most part continually led astray, instead of the proper correction they celebrate a second Passover within the same year.

Are we to follow these men, who are confessedly diseased with a dreadful error? For we could never allow ourselves to keep the Passover twice within one year.

But even if this were not the case, it would still have been fitting for your sagacity to be earnest, both in zeal and in prayer, always taking care that the purity of your soul should not, by any resemblance whatsoever, seem to have communion with the customs of utterly wicked men.

Besides this, one may also observe that in a matter of such magnitude, and in the festival of so great a religion, discord ought not to exist;

for our Savior has bequeathed to us one day of our liberty, that is, the day of his most holy passion, and he has willed that his catholic church should be one;

and although its parts may indeed be divided among many and diverse places, nevertheless it is cherished by one Spirit, that is, by the divine will.

Let the sagacity of your holiness consider how grievous and unseemly it is that on the very same days some should be occupied with fasting while others are holding banquets, and that after the days of Easter some should be found engaged in festivities and relaxation while others are given over to the appointed fasts.

For this reason, then, divine providence wills that this matter should receive the proper correction and be brought into one uniform arrangement — as I myself believe all perceive.

Wherefore, since it was fitting that this should be corrected in such a way that we should have nothing in common with those parricides and murderers of the Lord, and since there is a becoming order which all the churches of the western, southern, and northern parts of the world observe, together with some of those in the regions of the East — for which reasons all at the present time have judged this good — I too have promised that it will please your sagacity, so that whatever [is observed] throughout the city of the Romans, and all Italy and Africa...

— Egypt, Spain, Gaul, Britain, Libya, all Greece, and the dioceses of Asiana, Pontica, and Cilicia — is observed by one and the same harmonious judgment, this too your understanding may gladly welcome, considering not only that the number of churches in the aforesaid places is the greater, but also that it is most holy for all in common to desire this very thing, which sound reasoning likewise seems to demand, namely that we should have no communion whatsoever with the perjury of the Jews.

And, to state the most important point briefly: it was resolved by the common judgment of all that the most holy feast of Easter should be kept on one and the same day;

for it is not fitting that in a matter of such great sanctity there should be any difference at all, and it is better to follow that judgment in which there will be no admixture of another's error and sin.

These matters being thus set in order, gladly receive the heavenly grace and truly divine commandment;

for whatever is done in the holy councils of the bishops has reference to the divine will.

Wherefore, having made these matters known to all our beloved brethren, you ought henceforth to accept and establish both the aforesaid reasoning and the observance of the most holy day, so that when I arrive — as I have long desired — in the presence of your affection, I may be able to celebrate the holy feast together with you on one and the same day, and may rejoice with you in every respect, beholding the devil's cruelty abolished by divine power through our efforts, while our faith and peace and concord flourish everywhere.

God preserve you, beloved brethren. These things, then, he wrote to those who had been unable to attend.

But those who had assembled — they numbered three hundred and eighteen — he treated with kindness, both in words and in gifts, and having ordered many couches to be prepared, he feasted them all together at one time, taking the more worthy as companions at his own table, and dividing the rest among the other tables.

And when he saw that some had had their right eyes gouged out, and learned that their steadfastness in piety had been the cause of their suffering, he applied his lips to their wounds, believing that from these he would draw a blessing by his kiss.

When the banquet was concluded, he presented them with yet other gifts.

Moreover, he also gave letters to the governors placed over the nations, charging that in every city an annual grain allowance be furnished to the perpetual virgins, the widows, and those consecrated to the divine ministry — measuring this out more from generosity than from actual need.

A third part of these is furnished even to this day — Julian the impious having taken away the whole allowance all at once, while his successor ordered that what is now furnished should be provided.

For the famine at that time made the contribution small.

But if what was furnished at that time had been three times what is now provided, it would be easy for anyone who wishes to gauge the emperor's magnanimity.

Nor indeed do I think it right to pass over in silence that other matter as well;

for certain quarrelsome men drew up accusations against some of the bishops, and presented the written charges to the emperor.

But he, having received these before the reconciliation had taken place, then bound them together and sealed them with his own ring, and ordered them to be kept in safekeeping.

Afterward, having brought about the reconciliation, he had these documents brought out and, in their presence, burned them, having sworn that he had indeed read none of what was written in them.

For he said it was not fitting that the failings of priests should be made known to the multitude, lest, taking from this an occasion for scandal, they should sin without fear.

They say he added this also — that if he himself should happen to be an eyewitness of a bishop violating another man's marriage, he would cover the unlawful deed with his own imperial purple, so that the sight of what was being done might not harm those who beheld it.

Having thus exhorted them, and having deemed the priests worthy of such great honor, he bade each one return to take charge of his own flock.

But I, on account of the abomination of the Arians — who not only despise the fathers common to us all but even disown their own — wish to insert into my history the letter of Eusebius of Caesarea, which he wrote concerning the faith, since it contains a clear refutation of their madness.

For, while honoring this man as one of like mind with themselves, they directly contradict the very things written by him.

He wrote the letter to certain persons who held the opinions of Arius, who, as might be expected, accused him of betrayal.

But what he wrote shows better the intention of the one who wrote it.

Letter of Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, which he sent from Nicaea when the great council was convened.

You have probably already learned from other sources what was transacted concerning the faith of the Church at the great council convened at Nicaea, since rumor is wont to run ahead of the accurate account of what has taken place.

But lest through such hearsay the truth should be reported to you in a distorted form, we have thought it necessary to send you, first, the statement concerning the faith which we ourselves put forward, and then the second one, which they published after adding certain additions to our own words.

Now our own document, which was read in the presence of our most God-beloved emperor and pronounced to be sound and approved, runs as follows:

The faith set forth by us

As we received it from the bishops before us, both in our first catechesis and when we received the washing of baptism, and as we have learned from the divine Scriptures, and as we believed and taught both in the presbyterate itself and in the episcopate itself, so also now, holding the same belief, we set forth our faith:

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, God from God, Light from Light, Life from Life, the only-begotten Son, firstborn of all creation, begotten of the Father before all ages, through whom also all things came into being; who for our salvation was made flesh and lived among men, and suffered, and rose again on the third day, and ascended to the Father, and will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead.

We believe also in one Holy Spirit.

…truly Father, and Son, truly Son, and Holy Spirit, truly Holy Spirit — even as our Lord also said, when sending forth his own disciples to preach:

"Go, make disciples of all nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" — concerning which we solemnly affirm that this is so, and that we hold this belief, and that we have held it of old, and that we will stand for this faith even unto death, anathematizing every godless heresy;

these things we have held from the heart and soul from as far back as we can remember ourselves, and we now think and speak them in truth; we call God Almighty and our Lord Jesus Christ to witness, being able to demonstrate by proof and to convince you that in past times also we believed and preached these very things.

When this faith had been set forth by us, there was no room left for contradiction; but our most God-beloved emperor himself was the first to testify that it contained the most correct doctrine, and he confessed that he himself held these views, and he exhorted all to assent to it and to subscribe to its doctrines and to agree with them, with the addition of the single word "homoousios" [of one substance];

which he himself also interpreted, saying that the term "homoousios" is not used with reference to the affections of bodies, and that the Son does not subsist from the Father by any division or severance;

for a nature that is immaterial, intellectual, and incorporeal cannot undergo any bodily affection, but such things ought to be understood in divine and ineffable terms.

Such were the philosophical reflections of our most wise and most pious emperor; but they, on the pretext of the addition of the term "homoousios," composed the following document:

The faith dictated in the council

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only-begotten, that is, from the substance of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through whom all things came into being, both things in heaven and things on earth; who for us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh, became man, suffered, and rose again on the third day, ascended into the heavens, and is coming to judge the living and the dead;

but those who say "there was a time when he was not," and "before he was begotten he was not," and that he came into being out of things that did not exist, or who assert that the Son of God is of a different hypostasis or substance, or is subject to alteration or change — these the holy catholic and apostolic Church anathematizes.

Now, since this document was dictated by them, as to how they stated the phrases "from the substance of the Father" and "of one substance with the Father," we did not leave the matter unexamined.

Accordingly, questions and answers were raised on this matter, and discussion tested the meaning of what had been said.

And indeed it was acknowledged by them that the phrase "from the substance" signifies that he is from the Father, yet not as being a part of the Father.

It therefore seemed good to us also to assent to this understanding, since sound doctrine teaches that the Son is from the Father, yet is not a part of his substance.

For this reason we ourselves also assented to the meaning, not refusing even the term itself, since the aim of peace lay before our eyes, together with that of not falling away from the correct understanding.

On the same principle we also accepted the phrase "begotten, not made," since they explained that "made" is a term common to the rest of the creatures that came into being through the Son, to whom the Son has no resemblance whatever;

wherefore he is not a work resembling the things that came into being through him, but is of a substance superior to every work — a substance which, the divine oracles teach, was begotten of the Father, the manner of this begetting being both inexpressible and inconceivable to every created nature.

…upon careful consideration, reason establishes this — not after the manner of bodies, nor in a way resembling mortal creatures;

for it is neither by division of substance, nor by severance, nor indeed by any affection, or change, or alteration of the Father's power;

for the unbegotten nature of the Father is alien to all these things;

and the term "of one substance with the Father" indicates that the Son of God bears no resemblance whatsoever to created things that have come into being, but is made like in every way only to the Father who begat him, and is not from some other hypostasis or substance, but from the Father.

To this term, when interpreted in this manner, it seemed good to us also to give our assent, since we know that among the ancients also, certain learned and eminent bishops and writers made use of the term "homoousios" in their theology concerning the Father and the Son.

Let this suffice concerning the faith that was set forth.

With this we all agreed, not without examination, but according to the meanings given, which were examined in the presence of our most God-beloved emperor himself, and were confirmed to accord with the reasonings that have been stated.

We also judged the anathema which they appended after the creed to be acceptable, since it forbids the use of unscriptural expressions, on account of which almost all the confusion and disorder of the Church has come about;

since no divinely inspired Scripture makes use of the phrase "out of things that are not," or "there was a time when he was not," or the expressions that follow, it did not seem reasonable to say and teach these things.

And to this, since it seemed good, we likewise assented, seeing that even in the time before this we had not been accustomed to make use of these expressions.

Moreover, that the phrase "before he was begotten he was not" should be anathematized did not seem unreasonable, since it is acknowledged by all that he was the Son of God even before his birth according to the flesh.

Our most God-beloved emperor already established by argument that, even with regard to his divine begetting, he existed before all ages, since even before he was actually begotten he existed potentially in the Father in an unbegotten manner, the Father being always Father, just as he is always King and Savior, and being all things potentially, existing always and in the same way and unchangingly.

We have thought it necessary, beloved, to send these things to you, making plain the decisions of our examination and assent — how reasonably we then held out to the last hour, when what was written otherwise offended us, and how, without contentiousness, we then accepted what did not distress us, when, upon examining the sense of the words in good faith, it seemed to us to have manifest agreement with what we ourselves had confessed in the faith previously set forth. Now, that the appellation "homoousios" is not some novel term, nor one discovered by the fathers assembled on that occasion, but is handed down from ancient forebears to their descendants, Eusebius has clearly testified;

and that all who were then assembled unanimously accepted the faith that was set forth, he stated here also, and testifies again in another work, in which he extols with praises the reign of the great Constantine.

Having thus spoken in the Roman tongue, with another interpreting, he handed over the discourse to the presidents of the council.

From this point, some began by accusing their neighbors, while others defended themselves and made counter-accusations.

…to give occasion for him to be acknowledged by all…

And already what had been commonly decreed was being ratified in writing through the signature of each. And a little later he added the following again:

Having thus arranged matters, he dismissed them all to return to their own homes.

And they returned with joy; and thenceforth one opinion, agreed upon in the presence of the emperor himself, prevailed among them all, those who had long been divided being now joined together as it were into a single body.

at least to have believed him whom they were accustomed to admire [i.e., Eusebius], when he taught that this confession of faith had come about in harmony;

but since they contend even against the opinions of their own fathers, they ought, having learned of Arius's most shameful and horror-filled death, to flee with all their strength the impiety that he brought forth.

But since it is likely that not everyone knows the manner of his death, I shall relate this too, just as it happened.

This man, having spent a very long time in Alexandria, wished once more to force his way into the assemblies of the Church, disavowing his impiety and promising to accept the confession of faith set forth by the fathers.

But when he failed to persuade the divine Alexander, nor indeed Athanasius, the successor to his see and to his piety, he made his way again to Constantinople, through the efforts of Eusebius of Nicomedia.

The things that were contrived by that man, and adjudged by the righteous Judge, the most excellent Athanasius has related more fully in his letter to Apion.

But I too will include this portion in my history.

…in Constantinople, when that man died; and Macarius the presbyter was present, and I heard him tell it.

Arius had been summoned by the emperor Constantine, through the exertions of Eusebius and his party.

When Arius came in, the emperor questioned him as to whether he held the faith of the catholic Church.

He, then, swore that he believed rightly, and submitted a written confession of faith, concealing the very points for which he had been expelled from the Church by Bishop Alexander, and feigning the wording of the Scriptures.

So then, when he had sworn that he had not held the opinions for which Alexander had expelled him, the emperor dismissed him, saying:

"If your faith is orthodox, you have sworn well;

but if your faith is impious and yet you have sworn, may God from heaven judge your case."

So then, when he had thus gone forth from the emperor's presence, Eusebius and his party wished to bring him into the church with their customary violence.

But the bishop of Constantinople, the blessed Alexander, opposed this, declaring that the inventor of the heresy ought not to be received into communion.

And then Eusebius and his party threatened, saying:

"Just as we caused him to be summoned by the emperor even against your will, so tomorrow, even if it is not according to your judgment, Arius will assemble with us in this very church."

Now it was the Sabbath when he said these things.