Macedonius had been a homoiousian bishop of Constantinople who was deposed by the
8 For some history of this period see: Chadwick, The Church in Ancient Society, 201-445; Karl Baus et all, The Imperial Church From Constantine to the Early Middle Ages, 16-90.
34 Arians in 360. He was known as the founder of the heresy that denied the divinity of the Spirit, but the main promoters of that heresy were Eustathius of Sebaste, Eleusius of Cyzicus, and Marathonius. The Fathers at the Council of Constantinople (381) called them “Pneumatomachians,” i.e. those who fought against the Spirit.9 The creed issued by Nicaea had stated only that the Fathers believed “in the Holy Spirit”, nothing more. Controversy about the divinity of the Holy Spirit started when Macedonius and his followers who held that the Son was of like being with the Father, asserted that the Spirit was “only a superior creature.” None of the heretical works of Eustathius of Sebaste, Eleusius of Cyzicus, and Marathonius, have come down to us. For that reason we have no first hand knowledge of their argumentations.10
Athanasius and Basil of Caesarea were very important in developing theological arguments for the divinity of the Holy Spirit. Athanasius was prominent with his Letters to
Serapion, and Basil of Caesarea was notable with his work On the Holy Spirit.
The history of Gregory of Nazianzus, also known as Gregory the theologian, may be significant for us to understand better the intricate history of his time and the connection between the doctrine on the Holy Spirit and his very difficult life as a bishop. He was made “bishop of an insignificant little town called Sasima (372),” but he never exercised his office there.11 In 379 he was asked to lead the Christian community of Constantinople, and in that last city there was already Demophilus, the Arian bishop.12
The orthodox answer came soon through these theologian-bishops, who clarified the Christian doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Thus, Athanasius and Basil of Caesarea prepared and
9 See L’Huillier, The Church of the Ancient Councils, 102. 10 See Ibid.
11 He assisted his father in Nazianzus and he undertook an ascetic life in Seleucia.
12 That see since the exile of Paul in 342 had been continuously occupied byArians. It was only in 378 the emperor Gratian confirmed of the decision taken by Valens before his death to allow the return of pro- Nicene bishops to their sees. Thus, in Constantinople the little group of orthodox hoped to overturn the situation in the capital, and they approached Gregory the Theologian, probably with the support and suggestion of St. Basil and other orthodox bishops in the East. See L’Huillier, The Church of the Ancient Councils, 103-104.
35 simplified the path that Gregory the Theologian traversed. The fruit of that heritage from Athanasius and Basil was offered in an outstanding way by Gregory in this text:
The Old Testament clearly showed the Father, but only dimly showed the Son. The New Testament revealed the Son and hinted at the divinity of the Spirit. Today the Spirit lives among us, and is making himself more clearly known. As long as the divinity of the Father had not been recognized, it was dangerous to preach openly the Son; in the same way, as long as the divinity of the Son was not admitted, it was dangerous to impose, if we dare to use such words, the belief in the divinity of the Spirit as an added burden. You see the order in which God is revealed, an order that we must respect in our own turn: not revealing everything in a rush and without discernment but also not keeping anything hidden until the end of time. The one tendency risked injuring those who were outside and the other one would have separated us from our own brothers.13
Gregory the Theologian through that text helps us to appreciate and recognize how God freely and gradually revealed Himself as one God in three Persons in the history of salvation. L’Huillier asserts that from this period on, the dogma of the Trinity had found its definitive expression in Holy Tradition.14
In the fourth-century, Apollinarianism was a Christological heresy that denied the human soul in Christ. It took its name from Apollinaris, bishop of Laodicea. He was a friend of Athanasius of Alexandria, and both had been champions of Nicene orthodoxy. That heresy “signalized the point of transition from the Trinitarian to the Christological heresies”15. Apollinaris’s error was that he did not see how Christ could be one person if he had both a divine intellect and will, and a human intellect and will. He concluded that for Christ to be one person, the Divine Word must take the place of a human rational soul. Apollinaris with his attempt wanted to affirm the faith of Nicaea and protect the integrity of the incarnate Word, but despite his good intentions, he failed in doing that. Prior to the Council of Constantinople, Apollinaris’s proposal had already been condemned by synods of Rome, Alexandria and Antioch, because it contradicted the soteriological principle, articulated by
13 Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration XXXI, as cited in L’Huillier, The Church of the Ancient Councils, 103. 14 Ibid.
15 See F. Chiovaro, "Apollinarianism." New Catholic Encyclopedia. 2nd ed. Vol. 1. Detroit: Gale, 2003. 559-560. New Catholic Encyclopedia Complete. Web. 11 Mar. 2010, http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.bc.edu.
36 Gregory of Nazianzus, that “what was not assumed by the Word was not healed.”16 They insisted that for Christ to redeem humanity he must be fully human, having both a sensitive and rational soul.