The term
Μοναρχία
first acquired importance in patristic literature in
Justin’s work De monarchia, against
Polytheism. Of the lost letter of Irenæus to the Roman
Presbyter Florinus, who was deposed for heresy, presumably
gnostic, the title, according to Eusebius (H.E. v. 20),
was περὶ
Μοναρχίας, ἢ
περὶ τοῦ μὴ
εἶναι τὸν
θεὸν
ποιητὴν
κακῶν. Later it came to be
used to express not the Divine unity as opposed to Polytheism or
Oriental Dualism, but the Divine unity as opposed to
Tritheism. Vide the words of Dionysius of Rome, as
quoted by Athan. De Decretis, § 26, “Next let me
turn to those who cut in pieces, divide, and destroy that most
sacred doctrine of the church of God, the divine Monarchy, making
it, as it were, three powers and divided subsistences and three
godheads.” So St. Basil Cont. Eunom. ii.
᾽Αρχὴ
μὲν οὖν
πατρὸς
οὐδεμία,
ἀρχὴ δὲ τοῦ
υἱοῦ ὁ
πατήρ. And in
Ep. xxxviii. ᾽Αλλά τίς
ἐστι
δύναμις
ἀγεννήτως
καὶ ἀνάρχως
ὑφεοτῶσα
ἥτις ἐςτὶν
αἰτία τῆς
ἁπάντων τῶν
ὄντων
αἰτίας, ἐκ
γὰρ τοῦ
πατρὸς ὁ υἱ&
232·ς δι᾽ οὗ τὰ
πάντα. And in
Ep. cxxv. Ενα γὰρ
οἴδαμεν
ἀγέννητον
καὶ μίαν τῶν
πάντων
ἀρχὴν, τὸν
πατέρα τοῦ
κυρίου ἡμῶν
᾽Ιησοῦ
Χριστοῦ. On the
doctrine and its exponents compare § 72 of the De Sp.
S.
On the other hand
“Monarchians” was a name connoting heresy when applied to
those who pushed the doctrine of the Unity to an extreme, involving
denial of a Trinity. Of these, among the more noteworthy were
Paul of Samosata, bp. of Antioch, who was deposed in 269, a
representative of thinkers who have been called dynamical monarchians,
and Praxeas (supposed by some to be a nickname), who taught at Rome in
the reign of Marcus Aurelius, and of whom Tertullian, the originator of
the term patripassians, as applied to Monarchians, wrote
“Paracletum fugavit et patrem
crucifixit.” This heretical Monarchianism
culminated in Sabellius, the “most original, ingenious, and
profound of the Monarchians.” Schaff. Hist. Chr.
Church, i. 293. cf. Gisseler, i. p. 127,
Harnack’s Monarchianismus in Herzog’s Real
Encyclopædie, Vol. x. Thomasius Dog. Gesch. i. p.
179, and Fialon Et. Hist. p. 241.