The Trinitarian Controversy

The final two books are compilations of primary sources based around a theme. The first theme is the Trinitarian controversy and includes a selection of writings from most of the main individuals in the debate, including Arius, Alexander, Eusebius, Athanasius, Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa, and Augustine, as well as the decrees of the council of Antioch and Nicea. Before the writings a historical survey is given to help the reader place the selections into their historical context. The historical overview of the Trinitarian controversy tended towards extreme language at points. A prime example of this is the claim that “[n]o doctrine of the Trinity in the Nicene sense is present in the New Testament” (2). While it is true that the wording of Nicene is not found there, Nicene does not seem to be a conceptual advance over the New Testament, only a linguistic development. 

The purpose for putting this collection together was multifaceted. It was desired to give English readers a way to read about the debate from the participants themselves instead of being filtered through a secondary interpretation. One of the main hoped for results is increase a sense of the ecumenical spirit as the readers grapple with the diversity that was present in the early church (vii). The methodology is an essentially chronological selection of important texts from the debate, beginning with an historical overview but otherwise presenting no comments on the texts.

Several of the selections were highlights for my reading. The canons of Nicea (51-56) were helpful in illuminating what other issues were important to the bishops of the day, such as castration of bishops, the lapsed, the prohibition of bishops from moving from city to city, and whether one should kneel or stand for prayer. The letter by Eusbius to his church was a fascinating exercise in politics, as Eusebius tries to convince them that his own version has won the day. He goes so far as to explain how to get around the anathematizing of “before he was begotten, he was not”: even before he existed in actuality, he existed in potentiality (60). Athansius coins a great phrase: “Arian-maniacs” (65) This is a helpful book for understanding the debate. Apparently Princeton uses this book in their MDiv theology classes.

Login to add comments