Introduction
“History is a treasure house of
knowledge and wisdom. The present has its roots in the past, and a man who only
knows the life of to-day can never fully understand it.”[1] The doctrines of the
modern church have deep roots in the past. These doctrines have not always been
fully developed. Rather, current doctrinal beliefs are the result of much
disagreement and theological discussion through the last two thousand years. Much
can be learned from a proper understanding of the history of a doctrine and the
people who were key in the development of that belief. One such treasure house
of knowledge and wisdom is the life of Athanasius. Athanasius lived in a tumultuous
time in the history of the church, but through his steadfastness, he influenced
many of the church’s doctrines both then and now. Having lived through the
tumultuous times Athanasius’ influence greatly shaped the doctrine of the Holy
Spirit.
The
History of the Church Leading to Athanasius
Jesus was not the last person to die
because of what He taught. Following His death and resurrection was the stoning
of Stephen and the persecution of the new forming Church that would come to be
known as The Way “They went on stoning Stephen . . . And on that day a great
persecution began against the church in Jerusalem . . .” (Acts 7:59a, 8:1b).[2] Eventually the religious
tumult of this Roman province reached Rome in the person of Paul. Although
there is not a lot known as facts concerning Paul’s time of captivity in Rome,
“That Paul’s life was brought to an end in Rome by the executioner’s sword may
be confidently accepted, but tradition associates his execution with the
persecution of Christians in Rome which followed the great fire of A.D. 64 . .
.”[3] The great fire being the
fire that swept through Rome destroying much of the city. When rumors began to circulate
saying Nero was to blame for the fire, he accused and condemned the Christians.[4] Over the next three hundred
years, the Christians in the Roman empire encountered various levels of
persecution from the various ruling authorities.
Christianity was perceived as a new
religion, and its followers were considered to be dangerous to the empire.
“Christians were held responsible for various calamities since they did not
worship the traditional gods.”[5] “This avoidance of customs
regarded as natural by their pagan neighbors soon earned for them a reputation
as enemies of the human race.”[6] The three major charges brought
against Christians were they were atheist, cannibals, and participated in
incest.[7] An atheist in the first
century was someone who did not worship the traditional gods or follow their
practices.[8] According to this
definition, the Christians were considered atheist because they did not worship
Roman gods or follow the practices of the many Roman religions. The accusation
of cannibalism was because of the observation of the Lord’s Supper where they
spoke of eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ.[9] The charge of incest most
likely came from the early Christians referring to each other as brother and
sister.[10]
Some of the emperors that instigated
or allowed persecution were: Domitian, Trajan, Marcus Aurelius, Septimius
Severus, and Maximinus. The Christian’s situation took a particularly bad turn
under Decius and Valerian in the mid-third century. At the completion of this
time of persecution, a second period of peace began which would last until the
start of the fourth century when Diocletian tried to eliminate the church.[11] Constantine rose to power
in the West shortly after the resignation of Diocletian. Licinius gained
control of the East and met with Constantine “where they resolved their
differences and compromised on a common policy toward the Christians: the
property of the church was to be returned and full liberty of worship
permitted.”[12]
Constantine came to take an active role in the affairs of the church.
Athanasius’
Personal Life
It is believed that Athanasius was
born between 296-300 AD in Alexandria.[13] This date is chosen
because Athanasius did not show a personal recollection of the persecution
under Diocletian in 303 AD. Also, when he was made bishop of Alexandria, in 328
AD, he was perceived as being too young, “his enemies claimed that he was under
the canonical age of thirty.”[14] It is believed he could
not have been born later because some of his theology teachers were martyred in
311.[15] The population was a
mixture of Egyptian, Greek, and Jews.[16] “It [Alexandria] had come
to stand for the best of Greek culture. Here philosophers, poets, and artists
lived and flourished. As the East and West met commercially, so they met
intellectually at Alexandria.”[17] Because of Alexandria’s was
located on the Mediterranean near Lake Mareotis and the mouth of the Nile, it
was a center for thought and commerce.
A commonly held belief is that
Athanasius was born to Christian parents[18] who were somewhat
wealthy.[19]
Athanasius himself was poor. Athanasius would have been raised with the stories
of persecution from his mentors, and then at a young age, he witnessed the
persecution under Maximin Daia. From this turbulent beginnings, Athanasius
would face much unrest in the church as well as persecution for his beliefs.
Bishop Alexander and the church as a
whole recognized Athanasius as a promising individual. While still in his
twenties, Athanasius served as a deacon under Bishop Alexander.[20] During the council of
Nicaea in 325, Athanasius served as Bishop Alexander’s secretary.[21] Three years later in 328
Athanasius became the Bishop of Alexandria. Many were not pleased with his
appointment and used his age and accusations of “heavy-handed and violent
behavior”[22]
to try and discredit him. Despite the opposition, Athanasius grew extremely
popular among the people in his diocese. Athanasius worked tirelessly to
eradicate heresy and see the church unified. Over the course of Athanasius’
forty-five years as Bishop of Alexandria, he was exiled five times.[23] Athanasius spent seventeen
of those forty-five years in exile.[24] “But the dauntless bishop
is not a man to regret the price exacted for his loyalty to his convictions.
Better to be an exile in Gaul than a false bishop seated in full power at
Alexandria.”[25]
Athanasius was a key figure in the Arian
Controversy that surrounded the council of Nicaea. At the heart of the Arian
Controversy was the divinity of Jesus and the role He played in salvation. Even
from exile, Athanasius, through his correspondences, continued to play a major
role in the fighting for the Nicaean creed. “Athanasius’s steadfastness and his
writings blocked the Arians’ progress and prepared for the eventual victory of
the Nicaea cause.”[26] As the Arian controversy
started to come to a fragile close, questions regarding the Holy Spirit and His
role in the trinity were raised.
Beliefs
Regarding the Holy Spirit from the Fourth Century
During the fourth century the
confusion surrounding the Holy Spirit and His role within the Trinity became
evident. Many who had come to accept the deity of Jesus were not willing to
allow that the Holy Spirit was also God but rather “the noblest of creatures
produced by the Son at the Father’s bidding.”[27] Athanasius called this
group the Tropici “because they resorted to a figurative analysis of
Scripture.”[28]
This group was also known as the “Pneumatomachi, ‘spirit fighters,’ who, like
the Tropici before them, considered the Holy Spirit to be a creature, hence
something less than divine.”[29] The Tropici tried to show
the absurdity of the Holy Spirit being divine by asking two lines of questions.
The first question was whether the Holy Spirit was the brother of Jesus; this
would mean Jesus was not the only begotten son. The second question, along the
same lines, was if the Holy Spirit was the son of the Son of God, would this
not make God, the Father a grandfather. Combatting these views were the works
of Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius of Alexandria, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of
Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus.[30]
Cyril argued for the Holy Spirit’s
uniqueness from the rest of the created world. “No created being is equal in
honor to him [the Spirit]. Not all classes of angels, not all their hosts
together have equality with the Holy Spirit . . .”[31] He drew a second
distinction contending the Holy Spirit was different from other spirits. Basil
of Caesarea also made this distinction “One does not speak of the Spirit and of
the angels as if they were equals.”[32] Gregory of Nyssa insisted
that the Holy Spirit had the same divine nature as the Father and the Son.[33] Athanasius’ views will be
addressed shortly. Gregory of Nazianzus has the distinction of being the first
person to “declare explicitly that the Holy Spirit is God.”[34] At the council of
Constantinople in 381, the divinity of the Holy Spirit was confirmed.[35]
Athanasius
and the Holy Spirit
Athanasius, in his third exile in
the late 350’s, received word from Serapion of Thmuis that some Egyptian
Christians were becoming Tropici.[36] Athanasius, in a series
of letters, wrote to defend the position of the Holy Spirit in the Trinity.
There is some argument whether letters two and three were really one letter or
two. Either way, the series of letters presents Athanasius’ detailed defense of
the Holy Spirit.
Athanasius begins by addressing the
belief that the Holy Spirit is just a spirit.
Tell us,
then, is there any passage in the divine Scripture where the Holy Spirit is
found simply referred to as 'spirit' without the addition of 'of God', or 'of
the Father', or 'my', or 'of Christ' himself, and 'of the Son', or 'from me'
(that is, from God), or with the article so that he is called not simply
'spirit' but 'the Spirit', or the very term 'Holy Spirit' or 'Paraclete' or 'of
Truth' (that is, of the Son who says, 'I am the Truth'),— that, just because
you heard the word 'spirit', you take it to be the Holy Spirit?[37]
Athanasius
uses this argument to point out that not all references to “spirit” in the
Bible are referencing the Holy Spirit. By establishing this point, he is able
to discredit his opponents that were pointing to verses speaking of angels or
the spirit of man.
The next issue that Athanasius takes
on is the belief that the Holy Spirit is a creature. “But when did you find him
distinguished in nature and separated from the Son, that, while you say that
Christ is not a creature, you say that the Holy Spirit is a creature? . . . At
this rate you will number and join together with the Son, as well as with the
Spirit, the creatures originated through his agency.”[38]
Athanasius is saying that if the Holy Spirit is created and they are ranking
him as part of the Trinity then all created things could be ranked in the Trinity.
“If he were a creature, he would not be ranked with the Triad. For the whole
Triad is one God. It is enough to know that the Spirit is not a creature, nor
is he numbered with the things that are made. For nothing foreign is mixed with
the Triad; it is indivisible and consistent.”[39]
In
regards to the Tropici argument that the Spirit is either brother or son of
Jesus, Athanasius had some seething remarks to make. “But if the disciples of
Arius, because wisdom will not enter their deceitful hearts, are not able
intelligently to believe in the indivisible and holy Triad, let them not on
that account pervert the truth as well, neither let them say that what they
cannot understand cannot be true.”[40]
Athanasius also addressed their challenge of the Holy Spirit being either a
brother or son of Jesus.
And in the
Godhead alone, the Father is a father in the strict sense, and the Son a son in
the strict sense; and of these it holds good that the Father is ever Father and
the Son ever Son. As the Father could never be son, so neither could the Son be
a father. As the Father will never cease to be Only Father, so the Son will
never cease to be Only Son. By all accounts then, it is madness to envisage a
brother to the Son, or to ascribe to the Father the name of grandfather. For
the Spirit is not given the name of son in the Scriptures, lest he be taken for
a brother; nor son of the Son, lest the Father be thought to be a grandfather.
But the Son is called Son of the Father, and the Spirit of the Father is called
Spirit of the Son.[41]
Athanasius’
argument was that the Father could be nothing other than the Father. This is in
direct contrast to humanity where all but Adam had to be a son before they can
be a father. In the same way, the Son can be nothing other than the Son, He
will not be father. The natural extension to this line of argument is the
Spirit is to be called Spirit - nothing else is to be added to this title.
One of the duties of the Holy Spirit
is to make humanity share in the divine nature; the Holy Spirit could not do
this if He was not Himself divine.
If the Holy
Spirit were a creature, we should have no participation of God in him. If
indeed we were joined to a creature, we should be strangers to the divine
nature inasmuch as we did not partake therein. But, as it is, the fact of our
being called partakers of Christ and partakers of God shows that the unction
and seal that is in us belongs, not to the nature of things originate, but to
the nature of the Son who, through the Spirit who is in him, joins us to the
Father. [42]
Once
again Athanasius is demonstrating that the Holy Spirit is not a creature.
Rather He is divine and it is because of His being divine that He is able to
make humanity share in the divine nature of God.
Athanasius also used six sets of images
that he pulled from the scriptures to describe the Trinity and the function of
all within the Trinity. Denis Edwards describes Athanasius’ use of imagery in
this way: “his images, taken from the Bible, have a capacity to engage the
imagination. They speak of God in beautiful ways.”[43] Each set of images, shows
the role of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Three of the sets of images
that Athanasius uses are “[1] The Father, the Son, the Spirit who makes us Sons
and Daughters. [2] Fountain of Wisdom, the Wisdom of God, the Gift of Wisdom. [3]
The Fathers Works, the Son does the Works of the Father, the Works are
accomplished in the Power of the Spirit.”[44] Athanasius, with these
and similar arguments, demonstrated that the Holy Spirit was an equal part of
the trinity and not a created being.
The major complaint that modern
scholars have leveled against Athanasius is that he never came straight out and
said that the Holy Spirit was God. Davis wrote, “Athanasius did not call the
Spirit God.”[45]
Tibbs also commented, “While Athanasius, Basil, and Gregory of Nyssa maintained
the divinity of the Holy Spirit, they all came short of explicitly calling the
Holy Spirit God.”[46] This charge, at first
glance, would seem to put Athanasius in danger of heresy, however when looking
at the writings of Athanasius, it becomes clear that Athanasius was not denying
the Godhood of the Holy Spirit. Rather, Athanasius argued that the Holy Spirit
was a divine being not a creature, and He is an equal part of the Trinity.
Athanasius’ writings set the foundation upon which the Council of Constantinople
confirmed the divinity of the Holy Spirit in 381. The doctrine that the Holy
Spirit is an equal part of the Trinity is held by modern Christianity.
Conclusion
Athanasius lived and served in a tumultuous time in the
church and the world but through his steadfastness he influenced the beliefs of
many both then and now. One doctrinal area he was influential in developing is
the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Athanasius did not compromise his beliefs even
when exiled five times and in danger of his life. Through the theological
understanding and advancements of Athanasius diligent studying of the
Scriptures and his unwillingness to compromise his beliefs, we have a fuller
knowledge of the Holy Spirit and a preserved Nicaea Creed. “Some lives are so
vital that they speak a message to every age, and such a life was that of
Athanasius.”[47]
Bibliography
Anatolios,
Khaled. Retrieving Nicaea: The
Development and Meaning of Trinitarian Doctrine. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Academic, 2011.
Athanasius. The Letters of Saint Athanasius Concerning the Holy Spirit to Bishop
Serapion. Translated by C. R. B. Shapland. Epworth Press, 1951. http://thegroveisonfire.com/books/Athanasius/Athanasius-Letters-to-Serapion-CRB-Shapland.pdf. Web. Accessed October
14, 2016.
Bruce, F. F. Paul: Apostle
of the Heart Set Free. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2000.
Davis,
Leo Donald. The First Seven Ecumenical
Councils (325-787): Their History and Theology. Collegeville, MN: The
Liturgical Press, 1990.
Edwards, Denis. "Athanasius'
Letters to Serapion: Resource for a Twenty-First Century Theology of God the
Trinity." Phronema 29.2 (2014): 41-64. ATLA Religion Database
with ATLASerials. Web. Accessed October 8, 2016.
Ferguson,
Everett. Church History. Vol. 1, From Christ to the Pre-Reformation the Rise
and Growth of the Church in Its Cultural, Intellectual, and Political Context.
2nd. ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2013.
Hough,
Lynn Harold. Athanasius: The Hero.
NY: Eaton and Mains, 1906.
Tibbs, Clint. “The Spirit (World) and the (Holy)
Spirits among the Earliest Christians: 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 as a Test Case.”
The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 70.2
(April 2008): 313-330. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials. Web. Accessed October
14, 2016.
[1] Lynn Harold Hough, Athanasius: The Hero (Cincinnati, OH:
Jennings and Graham, 1906), 10.
[2] Unless otherwise noted, all
biblical passages referenced are in the New
American Standard Bible. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002).
[3] F. F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.
Eerdmans, 2000), 441.
[4] Everett Ferguson, Church
History Volume One: From Christ to the Pre-Reformation the Rise and Growth of
the Church in Its Cultural, Intellectual, and Political Context (Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2013), 63.
[5] Ibid., 65.
[6] Leo Donald Davis, The First Seven Ecumenical Councils
(325-787): Their History and Theology (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical
Press, 1990), 20.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ferguson, Church History, 66.
[10] Ibid., 66.
[11] Ferguson, Church History, 159.
[12] Davis, First Seven Ecumenical Councils, 28.
[13] Hough, Athanasius: The Hero, 35.
[14] Ibid., 35.
[15] Ibid.
[16] Ibid., 31.
[17] Ibid., 32.
[18] Ferguson, Church History, 204.
[19] Hough, Athanasius: The Hero, 36.
[20] Ferguson, Church History, 204.
[21] Ibid.
[22] Khaled Anatolios, Retrieving Nicaea: The Development and
Meaning of Trinitarian Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011),
100.
[23] Davis, First Seven Ecumenical Councils, 110.
[24] Anatolios, Retrieving Nicaea, 100.
[25] Hough, Athanasius: The Hero, 74.
[26] Ferguson, Church History, 206.
[27] Davis, First Seven Ecumenical Councils, 106-107.
[28] Ibid., 107.
[29] Clint Tibbs, “The Spirit (World)
and the (Holy) Spirits among the Earliest Christians: 1 Corinthians 12 and 14
as a Test Case,” The Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, 70.2 (April 2008): 313-330, accessed October 14, 2016.
[30] Ibid.
[31] Ibid.
[32] Ibid.
[33] Tibbs, “The Spirit (World),”
313-330.
[34] Ibid.
[35] Ferguson, Church History, 209.
[36] Anatolios, Retrieving Nicaea, 137.
[37] Athanasius to Bishop Serapion,
350’s, in The Letters of Saint Athanasius
Concerning the Holy Spirit to Bishop Serapion, trans., C. R. B. Shapland (Epworth Press, 1951), 31.
[38] Athanasius to Bishop Serapion, in The Letters of Saint, 35.
[39] Ibid., 41.
[40] Ibid.
[41] Ibid.
[42] Athanasius to Bishop Serapion, in The Letters of Saint, 45-46.
[43] Denis Edwards, “Athanasius’
Letters to Serapion: Resource for a Twenty-First Century Theology of God the
Trinity,” Phronema, 29.2 (2014):
41-64, accessed October 8, 2016, 48.
[44] Ibid., 49.
[45] Davis, The Seven Ecumenical Councils, 107.
[46] Tibbs, “The Spirit (World),”
313-330.
[47] Hough, Athanasius: The Hero, 157.
