Monarchianism and Sabellianism in the early church

Teaching that Father and Son are one person (Praxeas, Noetus, Sabellius) and Paul of Samosata; also Marcellus of Ancyra as his opponents charged. Part of Heresy.

Against Noetus 1Hippolytus of Rome · ca. 200–230 · Noetus of Smyrna taught that Christ was the Father himself; examined twice by the presbyters, he was expelled and founded a school.
Against Noetus 2Hippolytus of Rome · ca. 200–230 · The Noetians argue from texts on the one God that Christ, being God, is the Father, and so the Father suffered.
Against Noetus 3Hippolytus of Rome · ca. 200–230 · Like Theodotus, who made Christ a mere man, Noetus reads Scripture one-sidedly; one God does not abolish the economy.
Against Noetus 6Hippolytus of Rome · ca. 200–230 · Christ is God over all and Almighty because the Father has handed all things to him, yet he goes to his Father and God.
Against Noetus 7Hippolytus of Rome · ca. 200–230 · "I and the Father are one" shows two persons but one power; whoever has seen the Son, the image, knows the Father through him.
Against Noetus 8Hippolytus of Rome · ca. 200–230 · Scripture compels confession of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three, while God is one in power.
Against Noetus 11Hippolytus of Rome · ca. 200–230 · The Word is "another" beside God not as a second God but as light from light; even the heretics must admit one cause of all.
Against All Heresies 8Anonymous · early 3rd cent. (disputed) · The author ends with Blastus, who kept the Passover on the fourteenth, the two Theodoti, who held Christ to be a mere man (one ranking him below Melchizedek), and Praxeas, who identified the Son with the Father.
Against Praxeas 1Tertullian · ca. 213 or later · Praxeas brought to Rome the heresy that the Father himself was born and suffered, and also turned the bishop of Rome against the New Prophecy; Tertullian announces his refutation.
Against Praxeas 2Tertullian · ca. 213 or later · Against Praxeas, Tertullian sets out the rule of faith: one God under an “economy,” Father, Son, and Spirit, three in degree, form, and aspect but one in substance, condition, and power.
Against Praxeas 3Tertullian · ca. 213 or later · Simple believers fear that the Trinity divides God's “monarchy,” but a monarchy is not destroyed by being administered through a son or through officers; it is overthrown only when a rival god is set against the Creator.
Against Praxeas 4Tertullian · ca. 213 or later · Because the Son comes from the Father's substance and will hand the kingdom back to the Father, as Paul says, the Trinity preserves the monarchy; the same passage shows that Father and Son are two.
Against Praxeas 10Tertullian · ca. 213 or later · No one can be his own father or son; the Monarchians' claim that God made himself his own Son abolishes both Father and Son, and God's omnipotence proves nothing unless Scripture shows he did it.
Against Praxeas 20Tertullian · ca. 213 or later · Monarchians rely on three sayings of Jesus against the whole of Scripture; but the few must be read in the light of the many and the earlier.
Against Praxeas 25Tertullian · ca. 213 or later · In John's Gospel Christ promises “another” Paraclete, calls the Father the vinedresser, and after the resurrection speaks of ascending “to my Father and your Father”; the Gospel itself says it was written so that we might believe that Jesus is the Son.
Against Praxeas 31Tertullian · ca. 213 or later · To believe in one God without the Son and the Spirit is the Jewish faith; the gospel reveals one God in three persons, and those who confuse Father and Son deny both, like the antichrists John condemns.
Refutation of All Heresies 10.27.1Hippolytus of Rome · ca. 222–235 · Summary of Noetus: the one Father and God of all made everything and was invisible or visible as he willed.
Refutation of All Heresies 10.27.2Hippolytus of Rome · ca. 222–235 · For Noetus the one God is invisible or visible, unbegotten or born, impassible or suffering, and is called Son at different times.
Refutation of All Heresies 10.27.3Hippolytus of Rome · ca. 222–235 · Summary of Callistus: one God, Father and Son by name, one Spirit in substance; God is not other than the Word.
Commentary on John 1.151Origen · ca. 230–248 · Some treat the Word as a mere spoken utterance of the Father, denying him distinct subsistence.
Commentary on John 1.152Origen · ca. 230–248 · A spoken word cannot be a son; the Word must either lack subsistence or be a distinct divine being.
Commentary on John 10.246Origen · ca. 230–248 · Against those who merge Father and Son into one subject, Origen insists that Scripture shows them distinct, as Father of a Son and Son of a Father.
On the Trinity 12Novatian · ca. 240–250 · Hosea, Isaiah, and Habakkuk speak of God saving, coming, and working signs, which Christ fulfilled; so those who call Christ a mere man must either confess him God the Son or fall into Sabellianism.
On the Trinity 30Novatian · ca. 240–250 · Both Sabellians and adoptionists err by thinking “one God” excludes Christ's divinity; but as calling Christ Lord, Paul teacher, and Christ good does not undo the one Lord, Teacher, and Good, so Christ's being God does not undo the one God.
Commentary on Matthew 17.14Origen · ca. 246–248 · The crowds rightly but inadequately held Jesus to be a prophet; he is the Son and Wisdom of God, and those who teach falsely about him, though they gather in his name, scatter.
Letter of the six bishops to Paul 7Anonymous · ca. 264–269 · The bishops close by affirming that Christ is one and the same before the ages and ask Paul to sign whether he agrees.
Fragment I of the acts of the disputation with MalchionAnonymous · ca. 264–269 · A fragment of the disputation distinguishes the Word, begotten by God alone, from Jesus Christ born of the virgin, with whom the Word came together.
Fragment II of the acts of the disputation with MalchionAnonymous · ca. 264–269 · A saying of Paul of Samosata: the Word is greater than Christ, who became great through wisdom.
Fragment III of the acts of the disputation with MalchionAnonymous · ca. 264–269 · Paul of Samosata teaches that wisdom dwelt in Christ as in a temple, more than in the prophets, but that Jesus Christ and the Word are two.
Fragment IV of the acts of the disputation with MalchionAnonymous · ca. 264–269 · Paul of Samosata says that the visible Jesus was not wisdom, since wisdom cannot take a visible shape.
Fragment V of the acts of the disputation with MalchionAnonymous · ca. 264–269 · Malchion presses Paul that he denies that the only-begotten Son was present in essence in the whole Saviour.
Church History 5.28.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 300–325 · Eusebius introduces an anonymous work against the heresy of Artemon.
Church History 5.28.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 300–325 · The anonymous author refutes the claim that the “mere man” Christology was ancient.
Church History 5.28.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 300–325 · The Artemonites claimed their view was apostolic and held in Rome until Victor, and corrupted under Zephyrinus.
Church History 7.6.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 300–325 · Dionysius reports the Sabellian teaching in the Pentapolis and his letters against it.
Church History 7.26.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 300–325 · Dionysius wrote letters and four treatises against Sabellianism, the latter to Dionysius of Rome.
Church History 7.27.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 300–325 · Paul taught that Christ was a mere man; bishops gathered at Antioch, and the aged Dionysius sent his view by letter.
Church History 7.28.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 300–325 · Repeated synods debated, Paul's party concealing his views and the others exposing them.
Church History 7.29.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 300–325 · A final synod condemned and excommunicated Paul of Samosata (ca. 268).
Church History 7.29.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 300–325 · The presbyter and rhetorician Malchion exposed Paul in a recorded debate.
Church History 7.30.16Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 300–325 · Since Paul follows the heresy of Artemas, the synod need not judge his morals.
Prophetic Extracts 3.19Eusebius of Caesarea · before 325 (probably ca. 310–320) · Eusebius uses Micah's prophecy of Bethlehem against those who deny Christ's pre-existence (Artemon, Paul of Samosata, the Ebionites) and those who deny his real birth (Marcion); the section is badly damaged.
Letter 1.6Alexander of Alexandria · ca. 319–324 · Christ's sonship is by nature and cannot be lost, unlike the adoptive sonship of creatures; the new teaching revives the errors of Ebion, Artemas, and Paul of Samosata.
Against Marcellus 1.1.17Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · A bishop who makes Father and Son one in substance and hypostasis with different names is a Sabellian; the church confesses a begotten, subsisting Son.
Against Marcellus 1.1.22Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Eusebius sums up Marcellus: the Word only became Son at the incarnation and his kingdom will end.
Against Marcellus 1.1.23Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus makes Christ alone lose his kingdom and abandon his flesh at the end.
Against Marcellus 1.4.6Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus blames Asterius's claim that Father, Son and Spirit are truly such for the new heresy.
Against Marcellus 1.4.7Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus rejects a truly existing Father, Son and Spirit, and makes Christ a mere word.
Against Marcellus 1.4.21Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus blames Origen for giving the Word a second hypostasis.
Against Marcellus 1.4.31Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus argues the Word became the image of God only in the flesh, since an image must be visible.
Against Marcellus 1.4.32Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says an invisible Word cannot be an image, and that the verse refers to the birth in the flesh.
Against Marcellus 1.4.40Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus accuses Eusebius of making the Word another God, separate in substance and power.
Against Marcellus 1.4.41Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus quotes Eusebius on image and original as two substances, and likens him to Valentinus and Hermes.
Against Marcellus 1.4.54Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus argues from Gen 1:26–27 that God who speaks and God who makes are one.
Against Marcellus 2.1.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Eusebius begins Book 2: Marcellus denied that the Son existed before his birth from the Virgin.
Against Marcellus 2.1.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus compares the Word to a human word, at rest or active, and says this non-subsisting Word took flesh.
Against Marcellus 2.1.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus's Christ begins at the incarnation and ceases after the judgment.
Against Marcellus 2.1.8Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus contradicts Gabriel by denying both Christ's divinity and the permanence of his humanity.
Against Marcellus 2.1.9Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Unlike earlier heretics, Marcellus denies both Christ's pre-existence and his eternal kingdom.
Against Marcellus 2.1.10Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus deprives Christ, the high priest, of the kingdom the saints will share.
Against Marcellus 2.1.11Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus makes the author of life lose life itself, ignoring angel and prophets.
Against Marcellus 2.2.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says that before the incarnation the Son was only Word.
Against Marcellus 2.2.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says the Word was not the image before the incarnation, and that what came down was spirit, that is, God.
Against Marcellus 2.2.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus's argument implies that the Father himself became man.
Against Marcellus 2.2.6Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says the Godhead, an indivisible monad, is expanded only by activity in the incarnation.
Against Marcellus 2.2.7Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus grants a sending forth before the ages but rejects Asterius's further claim.
Against Marcellus 2.2.8Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus rejects “Son” for an impression of human generation and makes the Word a mere commanding word.
Against Marcellus 2.2.11Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus treats the Word of John 1:1 as like the commanding word of the prophets.
Against Marcellus 2.2.12Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus reads “in the beginning” as the Word in God in power, and “with God” as the Word active in creation.
Against Marcellus 2.2.13Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says “the Word was God” keeps the Godhead undivided.
Against Marcellus 2.2.14Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says John mentions no generation of the Word; the flesh belongs to the man, the spirit is one with the Father.
Against Marcellus 2.2.15Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus argues from John that the Word is in God and is the Father's power.
Against Marcellus 2.2.16Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus argues that “I and the Father are one” means inseparability of God and his Word, not agreement.
Against Marcellus 2.2.20Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus argues that if Father and Son were two hypostases in agreement, they would share all things in common.
Against Marcellus 2.2.23Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says “I and the Father are one” refers to the Word, not to the assumed man.
Against Marcellus 2.2.24Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus refers disagreement to the flesh and unity to the Word.
Against Marcellus 2.2.26Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says that before creation there was quiet, the Word being in God, and only God was eternal.
Against Marcellus 2.2.27Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says the Word had his glory by being in the Father.
Against Marcellus 2.2.31Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says God's Word is no more separable from him than a man's word, and creation was prepared in God's mind.
Against Marcellus 2.2.32Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus reads Prov 8:27 and Exod 3:14 as God speaking through his inseparable Word.
Against Marcellus 2.2.33Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus compares God speaking through his Word to our speaking through our word.
Against Marcellus 2.2.37Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says the Word to whom God said “Let us make” was no second God.
Against Marcellus 2.2.38Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus likens God's “Let us make” to a sculptor speaking to his own reason.
Against Marcellus 2.2.39Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says the Word came forth for creation and after the judgment will be in God as before.
Against Marcellus 2.2.40Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says the Word, within the Father before the world, came forth to make it.
Against Marcellus 2.2.41Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says Christ calls himself Son of Man so that humans may become sons by adoption, and the Word will return into God.
Against Marcellus 2.2.42Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · If God and his Word are one and the same, there is neither Father nor Son.
Against Marcellus 2.2.43Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus's own words refute his Jewish-like dogma of a mere word in God.
Against Marcellus 2.3.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says the names Jesus and Christ belong to the Word with flesh, used of the Word before only prophetically.
Against Marcellus 2.3.23Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says the Word became the image of God when he assumed the flesh.
Against Marcellus 2.3.37Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says the Word with flesh was made king so that fallen man might regain the kingdom.
Against Marcellus 2.3.38Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says Christ's kingdom had a beginning and is for abolishing the devil's power.
Against Marcellus 2.4.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says Paul teaches an end to Christ's kingdom when all are subjected to him.
Against Marcellus 2.4.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus repeats that Christ's kingdom had a beginning, citing Psalm 2.
Against Marcellus 2.4.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says a kingdom begun four hundred years ago will be handed back to God.
Against Marcellus 2.4.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says the Word is separated from the Father by activity only until the judgment.
Against Marcellus 2.4.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus asks whether the Word will keep the flesh after the judgment.
Against Marcellus 2.4.6Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus argues from John 6:63 that the flesh will not remain with the Word.
Against Marcellus 2.4.7Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus reads “until” in Ps 110:1 as fixing a limit to Christ's session at God's right hand.
Against Marcellus 2.4.8Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says 1 Cor 15:25 shows a limit to Christ's human kingdom.
Against Marcellus 2.4.9Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says Christ's partial kingdom ends when the Word reigns with the Father.
Against Marcellus 2.4.10Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus reads Acts 3:21 as a time limit for the union of the man with the Word.
Against Marcellus 2.4.12Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus concludes that the incarnation has a beginning and an end.
Against Marcellus 2.4.13Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus says the partial kingdom ends, and that immortality does not make the flesh worthy of God.
Against Marcellus 2.4.18Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus repeats his creed: the Word, having come forth, returns into God after the judgment.
Against Marcellus 2.4.21Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Eusebius rebukes Marcellus for innovating against the fathers and denying the Son.
Against Marcellus 2.4.22Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · A non-subsisting word cannot be a son; Marcellus makes all Christ's titles begin and end in time.
Against Marcellus 2.4.25Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · Marcellus would answer that the Word was in the body by activity only, united to God in substance.
Against Marcellus 2.4.31Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 336–337 · The synod rejected Marcellus's book because it denied both the Son's beginning and his endless reign.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.1.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Eusebius is astonished that Marcellus attacks Sabellius, whose view he shares.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.1.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus, by abolishing the Son's hypostasis, really teaches Sabellius's Son-Father.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.1.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus calls the Word God's son only in name, insisting he is properly a word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.1.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's view makes God himself incarnate, which the church condemned in Sabellius.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.4.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Those who make Father and Son the same belong in the synagogue and make the Father suffer.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.5.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus revives Sabellius, making God a composite of Father and Son.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.5.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Even the Jew is better than Marcellus, though Jews suffer for rejecting Christ.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.7.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Sabellius and Marcellus accept God and the flesh but deny the Son, who is light and truth.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.10.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus denies the Son's hypostasis; those who make him a creature deny his divinity.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.14.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · The church rejected Sabellius, and the first preachers named the Ebionites, for denying the Son's divinity.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.14.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Paul of Samosata was condemned for denying Christ's pre-existence as Son and God.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.14.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus disguised Sabellius's error but was caught in his own nets.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.14.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus attacked Sabellius to avoid suspicion.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.15.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says Sabellius erred by not knowing the Word, through whom alone the Father is known.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.15.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus, knowingly falling into Sabellius's error, deserves less pardon than Sabellius.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.16.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Christ calls himself Son of God throughout the Gospels, yet Marcellus says he calls himself only Son of Man.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.16.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus avoids calling Christ Son of God and calls him only Word and Son of Man.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.16.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus substitutes “Word” for “Son” in quoting Christ.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.16.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · The Saviour pairs Son with Father; Marcellus, avoiding “Son,” blames Sabellius for what he does himself.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.16.6Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Everyone grants God a word; Sabellius, like Marcellus, was expelled for denying a subsisting Son.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.16.7Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Eusebius shows that Marcellus, like Sabellius, makes God and his Word one and the same.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.17.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Eusebius repeats Marcellus's sayings that the Word is one with God, like a man's word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.17.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus compares God's Word to a signifying word inseparable in hypostasis.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.17.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus repeats his analogy of the human word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.17.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's words could be Sabellius's; Sabellius at least did not call a non-subsisting word Son.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.17.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus holds Sabellius's premise yet blames only Sabellius.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.17.8Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus introduces a Jewish dogma, insisting that before the world there was only God.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.18.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says “Word” is the only eternal name; all other titles come from the incarnation.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.18.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus repeats that before the incarnation the Son was only Word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.18.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says John mentions only the Word because the man came into being later.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.18.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus applies the names Jesus and Christ only to the incarnate Word, denying the living Son.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.20.17Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · The Son, distinct from the invisible Father, was in his bosom, as the saints will be in Abraham's.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.20.22Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's claim that Christ never calls himself Son of God cannot face the evidence.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.20.39Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · A word inseparable from God could not be taught, sent, or pleasing to him.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.20.41Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus must make either the Father, a subsisting Son, a human soul, or nothing at all move Christ's flesh.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.20.42Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Saying the Father was incarnate is Sabellianism; so the Son must be confessed.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.20.45Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · If Marcellus posits a human soul, he becomes a Paulianist; if a mere word, the next objections follow.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.20.50Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus repeats that before the incarnation he was only Word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.20.91Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus clings to “Word” alone because he Sabellianizes and denies the Son.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.20.92Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's “hidden mystery” of a word in God is something every Jew already grants.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 1.20.96Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Christ is the mystery the prophets veiled; Marcellus is ignorant of Scripture, and Eusebius turns to his Sabellianism.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.1.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Book 2: Marcellus's reasoning makes the Father himself born of the Virgin.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.1.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus identifies the Spirit who came on Mary with God the Father, renewing Sabellius.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.1.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus applies Bar 3:38 to the Father in the Word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.1.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus applies Lam 4:20 to the Word and then identifies that spirit with God the Father.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.1.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says that before the world there was only God, abolishing the Son's hypostasis.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.2.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus agrees with the Jew that only God existed before the world; the church confesses the Lord through whom all things exist.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.2.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Denying anything but God before the world makes one either a Jew or a Sabellian.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.3.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's view makes God his own father and son.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.3.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says the Word rested in God before creation and had glory only by being in the Father.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.3.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus calls the Word eternal, which Eusebius takes to mean unbegotten.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.3.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says the Word's eternity is united to the Father.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.4.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus calls God and the Word one indivisible monad, expanded only by activity.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.4.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · If God and his Word are one, the God over all was born and died, as Sabellius taught.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.5.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · One indivisible hypostasis of God and Word leaves no Father or Son, only Sabellius's Son-Father.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.6.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · The baptismal creed confesses Father and Son; “expansion” applies to bodies, not to God.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.8.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus allows a going forth before the ages but rejects a true Son as too human.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.8.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus denies the Word's generation and says he goes forth from God and returns.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.8.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's creed: the Word went forth for creation and returns into God after the judgment.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.8.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says the Word came forth from the Father to make the world.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.8.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus makes God's Word go out of God and return into him, a grave difficulty.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.9.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Eusebius asks what Marcellus's Word was while outside God: either a separate hypostasis or never outside at all.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.9.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's view makes both God and his Word change.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.9.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's quiet in God before creation resembles Valentinus's “God and Silence.”
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.9.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus implies that the Word went forth like a spoken human word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.9.7Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's view implies the Word will again be idle after the end.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.9.10Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Why should the Word fall silent when the saints live for ever?
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.9.11Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's view makes God deprive the saints of his Word in the kingdom.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.11.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus treats “light” as spiritual but “Word” as like a human word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.11.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Eusebius again quotes Marcellus's analogy and his account of the Word's going forth.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.11.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Eusebius quotes Marcellus's exposition of John 1:1.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.11.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus reads the clauses of John 1:1 as power and activity.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.11.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus enlists John for his denial of the Son's hypostasis.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.12.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · An eternal Word other than God makes two principles; the same as God makes Sabellianism.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.12.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's view makes the Father pray to himself; Eusebius turns to the true sense of John 1:1.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.14.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's view makes the Father a substance without reason and the Son its accident.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.14.8Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's identification makes John 1:1 say “God was with God.”
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.14.19Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · John's prologue teaches the Son's life and light; Marcellus Judaizes or Sabellianizes.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.14.20Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus agrees with the Jew on God alone before creation and with Sabellius on one Father-Son.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.15.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Eusebius again quotes Marcellus's analogy of the human word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.15.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus uses both the uttered and the internal human word as images of God's Word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.15.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says only the Word, who helped fashion man, could undo man's punishment.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.15.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's sculptor image attaches to God an internal and an uttered word like ours.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.16.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Every man has a word, but not every man has a son; so a word is not a son.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.16.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus pretends to confess the Son while making him a mere internal word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.19.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus accuses Asterius of separating Father and Son like a human father and son.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.19.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus argues that “I am he who is” cannot be said by one of two distinct hypostases.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.19.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus reads John 14:10 and Eph 4:5–6 as showing Father and Son are one.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.19.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus cites “worship the Lord your God alone” for an indivisible monad.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.19.8Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says his opponents make a second God, unlike the scribe who confessed one.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.19.9Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus cites Exod 3:15 for one person called Lord and God.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.19.15Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus argues from “I am” in Isa 41:4 that God is one person.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.21.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Eusebius restates Marcellus's dilemma about “I am he who is.”
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.21.6Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's dilemma ends by denying either the Father or the Son.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.24.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus mixes the healing Word with commanding words, avoiding the living Son.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 2.25.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · The commanding word Marcellus finds was known to Jews and Sabellius alike.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.3.43Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Elsewhere Marcellus admits that the Word speaks Prov 8:27–30.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.3.59Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says the Word prepared heaven within the Father as his thought.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.3.60Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Eusebius again quotes Marcellus on the Word preparing the world within God.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.3.63Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · “Glad before him” shows the Son's hypostasis; inside and outside imply a body in God.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.3.66Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus's view is either Jewish or Sabellian.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.4.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says three hypostases cannot be one unless the triad begins from the monad.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.4.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says the monad is expanded into a triad without division.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.4.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus argues the Spirit's relation to Father and Son shows an expanded monad.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.4.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus argues that distinct persons would make the Spirit either independent of the Son or not from the Father.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.4.5Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus makes Father, Son and Spirit three names of one hypostasis.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.6.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus makes one hypostasis with three faces and three names.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.8.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says the flesh will be abandoned by the Word at the end.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.9.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus repeats that the servant's form cannot remain with the Word.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.10.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Christ's glorified body and ours, conformed to it, refute Marcellus's view of the flesh.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.13.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus reads Acts 3:21 as limiting Christ's kingdom.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.13.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus takes “until” in Ps 110:1 and 1 Cor 15:25 as a limit.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.13.3Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Eusebius quotes Marcellus's argument for a limited kingdom.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.13.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says the incarnation will end when the kingdom is handed over.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.14.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · “Until” in Scripture does not imply an end, as Matt 28:20 shows.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.14.4Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus wrongly reads the Son's subjection as the Word's reunion with God.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.17.6Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus makes Father and Son one hypostasis and limits Christ's kingdom.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.17.7Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus says Christ's kingdom began and will end.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.17.8Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Marcellus argues a recent kingdom can be handed back.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.17.9Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Against Marcellus, the prophets give Christ an unending rule after the judgment.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.19.1Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · We become one with Father and Son as they are one, by shared glory, not by fusion.
On Ecclesiastical Theology 3.19.2Eusebius of Caesarea · ca. 337–339 · Eusebius answers the Sabellian proof-texts with Christ's prayer for his disciples' unity.
Oration II Against the Arians 13Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 339–346 · The Word was eternally Lord and King, as the Old Testament shows; Acts 2:36 speaks of the lordship over us that he acquired when he became man and redeemed all by the cross.
Oration III Against the Arians 4Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 339–346 · Father and Son are two, not one person named twice as Sabellius taught, yet one in nature and Godhead, like sun and radiance; so all that is said of the Father is said of the Son except “Father.”
Oration III Against the Arians 36Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 339–346 · Sayings like “was given to me” guard against Sabellius by showing that the Son is not the Father, while “as the Father has life … so the Son” shows that he has it eternally from the Father.
Oration III Against the Arians 51Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 339–346 · Luke 2:52 cannot mean that the Word as God advanced, since he is equal to God, always in the Father, and himself the source of wisdom and grace to all.
Oration IV Against the Arians 2Athanasius of Alexandria · 4th century (disputed) · The author argues that the Son is neither a quality in God nor a mere name, but a real offspring from the Father, two with him yet one.
Oration IV Against the Arians 3Athanasius of Alexandria · 4th century (disputed) · The author argues that the Word must be from God himself, and so is distinct from the Father yet one with him, and warns against making the Word merely attached to God.
Oration IV Against the Arians 9Athanasius of Alexandria · 4th century (disputed) · The author explains John 10:30: Father and Son are two, yet one in Godhead, the Son being of one substance with the Father, against both division and Sabellius.
Oration IV Against the Arians 10Athanasius of Alexandria · 4th century (disputed) · The author answers the charge of teaching two gods: Father and Son are two, yet one God, like fire and its radiance.
Oration IV Against the Arians 13Athanasius of Alexandria · 4th century (disputed) · The author traces the idea of the unity “broadening” into a trinity to the Stoics and shows that it implies change in God and leads to Sabellianism.
Oration IV Against the Arians 17Athanasius of Alexandria · 4th century (disputed) · The author explains that in John 10:30–38 Jesus refutes both Sabellius and Arius, and that the sayings of unity with the Father are spoken by the Son.
Oration IV Against the Arians 25Athanasius of Alexandria · 4th century (disputed) · The author rejects both Arius and Sabellius, and shows that the Sabellian image of one Father “broadened” into Son and Spirit makes the incarnation, baptism, and creation merely temporary.
Oration IV Against the Arians 30Athanasius of Alexandria · 4th century (disputed) · The author answers followers of Paul of Samosata who used Acts 10:36 to separate the Word from Christ, arguing that the Word himself, made flesh, preached.
Historical Fragments 1.4.1.4Hilary of Poitiers · ca. 343–367 · The Easterners complain that Western bishops received Marcellus without examining his book.
Catechetical Lecture 17.33Cyril of Jerusalem · ca. 350 · Paul's letters show the Spirit as living and personal; the order of the creed's articles excludes Sabellius' error even though "spirit" is said of Father, Son, and Spirit alike.
On the Decrees of Nicaea 24Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 350–356 · The Son is of the same essence as the Father, as radiance with light; and the council’s terms were already used by Theognostus and by Dionysius of Alexandria.
On the Decrees of Nicaea 26Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 350–356 · Dionysius of Rome condemned both those who divide the Godhead into three gods and those who call the Son a thing made, upholding the Triad and the one monarchy.
On the Opinion of Dionysius 5Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 350–356 · Dionysius wrote the disputed letter against Sabellian bishops in the Pentapolis, stressing the Son’s human traits to show that the Son, not the Father, became man.
On the Opinion of Dionysius 9Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 350–356 · Like the apostles, Dionysius stressed Christ’s human traits against Sabellius, while elsewhere calling him Word, Wisdom, and Radiance of the Father; the one Christ is spoken of both as God and as man.
On the Opinion of Dionysius 13Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 350–356 · Some brothers denounced Dionysius of Alexandria to Dionysius of Rome, who condemned both Sabellianism and the creature doctrine; Dionysius of Alexandria then wrote his Refutation and Defense.
On the Opinion of Dionysius 26Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 350–356 · Against the Sabellians one should begin from Christ’s human traits, which show that the Son, not the Father, became flesh, and then teach his divinity.
On the Opinion of Dionysius 27Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 350–356 · Against Sabellius, Christ’s human traits are decisive; against the Arians, his divine titles; the Arians, having no support in the fathers, follow only the devil.
On the Trinity 1.26Hilary of Poitiers · ca. 356–360 · Book 7 will set Sabellius, Ebion, and the Arians against one another, each refuting the others, while the church confesses Christ as true God born before the ages and made man.
On the Trinity 2.4Hilary of Poitiers · ca. 356–360 · Hilary surveys the errors of Sabellius, Ebion, and the Arians of his day, and how they also corrupt the doctrine of the Holy Spirit.
On the Trinity 2.23Hilary of Poitiers · ca. 356–360 · The Gospels answer Sabellius, Ebion, and the Arians alike; Peter's confession, “You are the Son of the living God,” is the rock of faith.
On the Trinity 6.11Hilary of Poitiers · ca. 356–360 · By condemning Sabellius, the Arians aim to remove all unity between Father and Son; the church rejects Sabellian union but holds the unity of nature.
On the Trinity 7.3Hilary of Poitiers · ca. 356–360 · Hilary writes amid danger from Sabellius, the Arians, and Photinus; the church must confess one God who is not solitary.
On the Trinity 7.5Hilary of Poitiers · ca. 356–360 · Sabellius, seeing God's power in Christ, merges Father and Son; but “I and the Father are one” signifies two persons of one nature.
On the Trinity 7.6Hilary of Poitiers · ca. 356–360 · The Arians and Sabellius refute each other: Sabellius shows God in Christ's works, the Arians that the Son is distinct; the church holds both.
On the Trinity 7.7Hilary of Poitiers · ca. 356–360 · Photinus, Sabellius, and the Arians each refute part of the others' errors; the church holds the whole truth: the Son exists, is God by nature, and is the Creator before the ages.
On the Trinity 7.39Hilary of Poitiers · ca. 356–360 · The Father and the Son are in each other not as one person in two masks, nor by mixing, but by the birth of living God from living God.
On Not Agreeing with Heretics 9Lucifer of Cagliari · ca. 356–361 · Lucifer argues that heretics such as Sabellius, Marcion, Paul of Samosata and Arius have been cut off from the church like an offending member, and contrasts the Arian creed with the apostolic faith in Father, Son and Spirit.
Letters to Serapion 4.5Athanasius of Alexandria · ca. 357–360 · What is handed down by faith is not to be pried into; the disciples simply believed the baptismal formula, and only heretics like Eunomius and Eudoxius ask whether the Spirit is a son.
Letter 126Basil of Caesarea · ca. 357–378 · Basil summons Atarbius of Neocaesarea to meet him and clear himself of reports that he had acted against the church's order and taught something akin to Sabellianism.
Letter 129Basil of Caesarea · ca. 357–378 · Basil tells Meletius why he named Apollinarius as near to Sabellianism, reports a delay in the emperor's action against him, and suggests what the letter to the Western bishops should say.
Letters 210, 211Basil of Caesarea · ca. 357–378 · Basil answers the leading men of Neocaesarea, who had been told he came to intrigue there: he came to rest at his childhood retreat, and the real issue is the revived Sabellianism of their leaders; then (Letter 211) he thanks Olympius for a cheering letter.
Letter 214Basil of Caesarea · ca. 357–378 · Basil warns Count Terentius against the party of Paulinus at Antioch and its Western letters, defends Meletius, and explains why speaking of one hypostasis in God gives ground to Sabellianism: essence is common, hypostasis particular.
Letter 224Basil of Caesarea · ca. 357–378 · Basil tells the presbyter Genethlius that the Eustathians who broke with him have attached heretical writings to their letters to make them look like his, denies any communion with Apollinarius, and points to the creed they signed and then abandoned.
Letters 265, 266Basil of Caesarea · ca. 357–378 · Basil writes to exiled Egyptian bishops denouncing the innovations of Apollinarius and warning them not to admit the followers of Marcellus without an anathema of his heresy; a second letter, to Peter of Alexandria, explains his silence about recent disorders, accepts Peter's approach to the Marcellians, and defends Meletius and Eusebius against the charge of Arianism.
Against the Arians 5Phoebadius of Agen · ca. 357-358 · Phoebadius rejects Potamius’s teaching that Christ’s spirit and flesh were fused so that God became passible, arguing that Christ’s divine and human substances each kept their own properties.
Against the Arians 13Phoebadius of Agen · ca. 357-358 · Phoebadius explains “The Father is greater than I” as referring to the Father as unoriginate source, and shows that “I in the Father and the Father in me” rules out both Sabellius and Arius.
Against the Arians 22Phoebadius of Agen · ca. 357-358 · Phoebadius sets the Catholic rule between the Patripassian and Arian errors: one substance in distinct persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one God.
Against Arius 1.44Marius Victorinus · ca. 357–362 · Victorinus distinguishes his teaching from Patripassianism: the Father is impassible, and the Son suffered only according to the flesh, while divine “emotions” are not passions but nature.
On the Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia 24Athanasius of Alexandria · 359 (additions 361) · Theophronius of Tyana’s creed, accepted by all at Antioch, condemned Marcellus, Sabellius, and Paul of Samosata.
On the Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia 26Athanasius of Alexandria · 359 (additions 361) · The Long-Lined Creed (Macrostich) of 344, sent to Italy, rejects Arius’s slogans, Marcellus and Photinus, and Sabellius, while subordinating the Son to the Father.
On the Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia 27Athanasius of Alexandria · 359 (additions 361) · The First Creed of Sirmium (351), drawn up against Photinus, repeats the Antiochene creed and adds twenty-seven anathemas.
On the Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia 45Athanasius of Alexandria · 359 (additions 361) · The council against Paul of Samosata rejected “of the same essence” in Paul’s bodily sense, while Nicaea affirmed it against the Arians; like Paul’s varied statements about the law, both are right in their context.
Apology 6Eunomius of Cyzicus · ca. 360 · Eunomius says the simple creed does not suffice, since even Sabellius, Marcellus, and Photinus could accept it, and promises a more exact account of his view.
On the Orthodox Faith against the Arians 7Gregory of Elvira · ca. 360-392 · The author explains that Father and Son are two persons but one God and one substance, citing Baruch and Isaiah, and rejects both Sabellius and the Arians.
Oration 2.37Gregory of Nazianzus · ca. 362–383 · Gregory names three errors about God, Sabellian fusion, Arian division, and tritheist polyarchy, and rejects all three.
Oration 20.2Gregory of Nazianzus · ca. 362–383 · Gregory argues from the Old Testament that only the purified may approach God, sets out the doctrine of the Trinity between Sabellius and Arius, answers objections to the Son’s eternal generation, and urges purification and humility before speaking of God.
Oration 25.12Gregory of Nazianzus · ca. 362–383 · Gregory describes the outrages committed by the Arians in Alexandria, Hero’s scourging and four years’ exile in the Oasis, and urges him to confute paganism and heresy, setting out the doctrine of Father, Son, and Spirit.
Oration 39.10Gregory of Nazianzus · ca. 362–383 · Both Sabellius' merging and Arius' division of God are to be rejected as equally impious.
Oration 43.30Gregory of Nazianzus · ca. 362–383 · When the Arian emperor Valens attacked the church, Basil, at Gregory's urging, returned from Pontus, reconciled with his bishop, and led the defence of the faith in the Trinity.
Homilies 16.1Basil of Caesarea · ca. 363-378 · Expounding John 1:1, Basil shows that the Word's “beginning” has no beginning before it and that the fourfold “was” refutes the Arian “there was when he was not,” while “Word” and “with God” exclude both passion in the begetting and Sabellian confusion.
Homilies 24.0Basil of Caesarea · ca. 363-378 · Title of Basil's homily against the Sabellians, Arians and Anomoeans.
Homilies 24.1Basil of Caesarea · ca. 363-378 · The Sabellians renew Judaism by making Father and Son one person, the Anomoeans renew paganism by worshiping a created Son; Christ's own words show two persons and one nature.
Against Parmenian the Donatist 5.1Optatus of Milevis · ca. 366–385 · Optatus begins Book 5 on baptism: Parmenian's own figures of the single flood and single circumcision show that baptism, made holy by the Trinity and not by the minister, cannot be repeated.
Letter 17.2Jerome · ca. 370–419 · Jerome protests that the monks of the desert brand him a heretic, though his Trinitarian faith is that of Damasus and Peter of Alexandria.
On the Holy Spirit 25.59Basil of Caesarea · ca. 374–375 · "With" and "and" link the names equally, but "with" also shows the distinct hypostases and their inseparable fellowship, refuting both Sabellius and those who separate the persons in time.
On the Holy Spirit 29.72Basil of Caesarea · ca. 374–375 · Basil cites earlier writers for the Spirit's place in the doxology: Dionysius of Alexandria's closing "with the Holy Spirit," Clement of Rome, Irenaeus, and Eusebius.
Ancoratus 6.4Epiphanius of Salamis · 374 · Confessing “consubstantial” refutes Sabellius.
Ancoratus 17.6Epiphanius of Salamis · 374 · The Son's session at the right hand refutes both Sabellius and Arius.
Ancoratus 116.8Epiphanius of Salamis · 374 · Arians and Sabellians long for Egypt.
Ancoratus 116.9Epiphanius of Salamis · 374 · The Sabellians deny distinct Son and Spirit.
Ancoratus 117.1Epiphanius of Salamis · 374 · The baptism in the Jordan refutes the Sabellians.
Panarion (Adversus Haereses), Haer. 1-64 57.1.1Epiphanius of Salamis · 374-377 · Noetus of Asia is introduced.
Panarion (Adversus Haereses), Haer. 1-64 57.1.2Epiphanius of Salamis · 374-377 · Noetus taught that the Father suffered.
Panarion (Adversus Haereses), Haer. 1-64 57.1.8Epiphanius of Salamis · 374-377 · Noetus defended himself as glorifying one God who suffered.
Panarion (Adversus Haereses), Haer. 1-64 57.2.2Epiphanius of Salamis · 374-377 · Noetians identify the Father and the Son.
Panarion (Adversus Haereses), Haer. 1-64 57.2.7Epiphanius of Salamis · 374-377 · The Noetian confession makes the one God Father and suffering Son.
Panarion (Adversus Haereses), Haer. 1-64 57.2.9Epiphanius of Salamis · 374-377 · Noetus and Theodotus err at opposite extremes.
Panarion (Adversus Haereses), Haer. 1-64 57.3.2Epiphanius of Salamis · 374-377 · Identifying Father, Son, and sufferer is audacious and blind.
Panarion (Adversus Haereses), Haer. 1-64 62.1.1Epiphanius of Salamis · 374-377 · Sabellius is introduced as recent.
Panarion (Adversus Haereses), Haer. 1-64 62.1.2Epiphanius of Salamis · 374-377 · Sabellius resembles Noetus.
Panarion (Adversus Haereses), Haer. 1-64 62.1.4Epiphanius of Salamis · 374-377 · Sabellians hold three names in one hypostasis.
Panarion (Adversus Haereses), Haer. 1-64 62.3.5Epiphanius of Salamis · 374-377 · Against both Sabellius and Arius.
On the Christian Faith 1.1Ambrose · ca. 378–380 · Ambrose states the faith in one God against pagans, Jews, Sabellius, Photinus, and Arius, and argues from the baptismal formula and John 10:30 that the Trinity has one name, one nature, and one power.
On the Christian Faith 1.8Ambrose · ca. 378–380 · Ambrose argues that the Son is everlasting from Isa 43:10 and from the fourfold “was” of John 1:1–2, which he finds to refute Arius, Sabellius, Photinus, Eunomius, and the Manichaeans.
On the Christian Faith 5.8Ambrose · ca. 378–380 · Ambrose explains that Christ calls the Father “Lord” in respect of his servant form, uses Christ’s question about David’s son and Lord to refute several heresies, and refers texts about Christ as servant and being glorified to his incarnation.
On the Christian Faith 5.13Ambrose · ca. 378–380 · Ambrose explains the Son’s future subjection to the Father (1 Cor 15:28) not as a subjection of his divinity, nor as his being absorbed into the Father, but as his subjection in his body, the Church, when all believers are subject to God.
Anathema 2Anonymous · ca. 378–382 (traditionally 382) · Anathema on the Sabellians, who identify the Father with the Son.
Theological Oration 3 (Or. 29), On the Son 2Gregory of Nazianzus · 380 · Christians worship a divine monarchy that is not one person but one nature shared by Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: the unbegotten, the begotten, and the one who proceeds.
Chapter 2Nicetas, bishop of Remesiana · ca. 380–414 · Nicetas passes over Sabellius, who confused the Father with the Son and Spirit, and Photinus, who made Christ a mere man, both already condemned.
Book of Heresies 53.1Philastrius of Brescia · ca. 380s · Noetus identified the Father with Christ.
Book of Heresies 54.1Philastrius of Brescia · ca. 380s · Sabellius followed Noetus; his followers were cast out.
Book of Heresies 64.1Philastrius of Brescia · ca. 380s · Paul of Samosata denied that the Word is a personal, eternal Son.
Second Apology of David 26Ambrose · ca. 384-397 · Christ’s question about Psalm 110 refutes not only the Jews but Photinians, Sabellians, and Arians: the Son, distinct from the Father, shares his throne and power.
Homilies on Matthew 7.4John Chrysostom · ca. 390 · The star led the magi to the very child and stood over him, confirming their faith; their gifts refute Marcion (Christ truly in the flesh) and Paul of Samosata (not a mere man); the magi's precedence over the Jews foreshadowed the Gentiles' faith.
Sermon 52.6Augustine of Hippo · ca. 391-430 · If Father and Son act inseparably, must we say the Father was born and suffered? No: the Creed says the Son, not the Father, was born and suffered, and the Church excluded the Patripassians who taught otherwise.
Sermon 183.7Augustine of Hippo · ca. 391-430 · The Sabellian, who makes the Son the same as the Father, describes someone who is not Christ and so denies that Christ has come in the flesh.
On Illustrious Men 71Jerome · 392–393 · Malchion of Antioch disputed against Paul of Samosata and wrote the synod's letter against him.
On the Christian Struggle 16Augustine of Hippo · ca. 396–397 · Augustine rejects those who say the Father alone exists and is merely called Son or Spirit.
Canon 21.2Anonymous · ca. 397–400 · Anathema on those who identify the Father with the Son or the Spirit.
Canon 21.3Anonymous · ca. 397–400 · Anathema on those who identify the Son with the Father or the Spirit.
Canon 21.4Anonymous · ca. 397–400 · Anathema on those who identify the Spirit with the Father or the Son.
Commentary on the Apostles' Creed 5Rufinus of Aquileia · ca. 404 · 'One God' means one without any other; 'almighty' applies also to the Son; 'invisible and impassible' were added at Aquileia against the Patripassians.
Tractates on the Gospel of John 29.7Augustine of Hippo · ca. 406–420 · “My teaching is not mine” refutes the Sabellians, who held that Father and Son are one thing with two names.
Tractates on the Gospel of John 36.8Augustine of Hippo · ca. 406–420 · Against the Patripassians, the Father did not become incarnate, yet he did not withdraw from the incarnate Son, for God is everywhere.
Tractates on the Gospel of John 36.9Augustine of Hippo · ca. 406–420 · Christ's words both distinguish the persons of Father and Son against the Sabellians and, with “I and the Father are one,” affirm one substance against the Arians.
Tractates on the Gospel of John 37.6Augustine of Hippo · ca. 406–420 · Between the Sabellians, who make Father and Son one person, and the Arians, who make the Son different in substance, the Catholic faith holds “I and the Father are one.”
Tractates on the Gospel of John 37.7Augustine of Hippo · ca. 406–420 · “If you knew me, you would know my Father” shows the Son's likeness to the Father, as one recognizes a man from someone very like him; against the Arians, Father and Son are one.
Tractates on the Gospel of John 40.3Augustine of Hippo · ca. 406–420 · “Then you will know that I am” is guarded against the Sabellians by “I do nothing of myself,” which shows that the Son is God from God, not from himself.
Tractates on the Gospel of John 45.5Augustine of Hippo · ca. 406–420 · Heretics such as Sabellius, Arius, and Photinus do not enter by the door, for they preach a Christ of their own making; the fold is the Catholic Church, and the door is entered only by humility.
Tractates on the Gospel of John 53.3Augustine of Hippo · ca. 406–420 · Calling the Son the Father's arm is a figure of speech and gives no support to those who deny that the Son is a distinct person.
Tractates on the Gospel of John 70.2Augustine of Hippo · ca. 406–420 · Some disciples knew the Son and so, through his perfect likeness, knew the Father; Philip did not. Father and Son are two, yet so alike that to know one is to know both.
Tractates on the Gospel of John 71.2Augustine of Hippo · ca. 406–420 · Against both Arians, who make the Son unequal, and Sabellians, who make him the Father, Augustine holds that the Son is other than the Father yet equal to him, from him and inseparable from him.
Against Five Heresies 3Quodvultdeus of Carthage · ca. 437-450 · Against the pagan objection that a divine Son requires a divine marriage, the preacher cites Hermes Trismegistus and the Sibyl on the Son of God, the Word of wisdom born of God alone.
Against Five Heresies 6Quodvultdeus of Carthage · ca. 437-450 · The Arian who confesses the Creed but denies the Son’s eternity is asked how he can divide the inheritance of peace, like the false mother before Solomon; Scripture and the likeness of fire and its brightness show Father and Son distinct yet one, eternal God.
Against Five Heresies 7Quodvultdeus of Carthage · ca. 437-450 · Against Sabellians and Arians the preacher argues from Isaiah 45, Christ’s prayer, and the Transfiguration that the Father and Son are two and equal, and protests against Arian rebaptism and bribery of Catholics.
Canon 16Anonymous · date disputed (between ca. 442 and 506) · Photinians and followers of Paul of Samosata are to be baptized on joining the church.