history of salvation. This, however, does not affect the one God, for he remains 'inseparably' only a monad. Marcellus rejected an ontological distinction (i.e., on the level of being) in the unique hypostasis of the one God, in order to undermine the radical subordinationism of Arian Logos-theology. Because he did not concede that the Logos, in the activity of creation and incarnation, has his own separate existence alongside the Father, he cannot establish for the incarnation an ontological relation between the Logos and Jesus, the assumed human being.

Apollinarius accepted Eusebius' polemical conclusion: like Paul of Samosata, Marcellus cannot confess Jesus Christ as God, but only as a being 'from below', 'from the earth', i.e., apparently a mere man inspired by God.

Because Marcellus stands in the monarchianist tradition, he does not recognise this defect of his apologia for the Nicene faith. For him Christ is God because he is the saviour. According to Christians, the passage at Baruch 3.3537 about God 'being seen on the earth' refers to Christ, who is anointed as saviour and whose work is the Father's. From his standpoint Marcellus clearly rejected the concept of Christ as a mere inspired man.

'The paradoxical one': Noetus against the Gnostic separation of Christ and Jesus

As has been stressed above, Athanasius and Apollinarius, as well as their contemporaries, did not recognise that their confession ofthe one incarnate Logos as the single subject of all Christological statements followed the tradition of anti-Gnostic monarchianism. Noetus of Smyrna (mid-second century) had created, by means of his rule of faith, a formula of antitheses, which would have a powerful impact on the history of the Great Church, the catholica.2

Noetus' antitheses Noetus' regulafidei knows no pre-temporal birth of the Son, but only his virgin birth (Luke 1.35). Although this may seem strange to later readers, virgin birth is what Noetus attributes to the sole God, the Father. The regula defines this God as 'the paradoxical one'; he is the single subject to whom both the philosophical divine predicates and, as antitheses to these, the biblical statements about Jesus Christ apply. Noetus' regula - the text of which is transmitted in Hippolytus of Rome's Refutatio omnium haeresium - contains some excerpts from a homily:

2 See R. M. Htibner, Der Paradox Eine. Hubner recognises that his thesis has already been put forward by previous scholars: see, e.g,. A. Harnack, 'Monarchianismus'.

0 0

Post a comment