Our Knowledge of God: The Relevance of the Debate between Eunomius and the Cappadocians

Abstract

The Arian Controversy, spanning at least seventy years, did not run along a single track. 2 We would expect the issues to shift over such a period of time, especially if recent scholarship is right in recognising in Arius himself a rather isolated figure both theologically and ecclesiastically. 3 The issues posed by Arius were, however, real concerns of the day even if few followed Arius exactly. The Council of Nicaea may have pointed the way to some answers; but its sig-nificance was lost for almost a generation until the emergence of a movement of extreme Arian tendency. It was dubbed Anomoeanism by its opponents because of its bland affirmation that the Son of God was unlike (ἀνόμοιος) the Father in substance. Recent scholarship, however, has preferred to use the term Neo-Arianism to designate this movement. 4 This title does leave open whether the movement was reproducing the teaching of Arius in a new guise or not. I believe that in its beginnings the movement reflected a brazen ___________________________ 1 In this paper I have concentrated on those works of Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa which seek directly to refute the writings of Eunomius. These make up one extended controversy. For details see R.P. Vaggione Eunomius: The Extant Works (OUP 1987) XV. This means that I have not treated the work of Gregory of Nazianzus, whose justly famous Theological Orations, delivered in Constantinople in 380, are directed primarily against Eunomius' partisans in the city, but envisage popular Neo-Arian theologising rather than a specific document. 2 It is generally agreed that the Arian Controversy began about 318. The death of Eunomius sometime in the 390's marks a rough terminal point. Though Arian and Neo-Arian groups persisted after this point, they ceased to be in the forefront of doctrinal debate. In effect, they became sectarian churches.