Arianism

Arianism was a major theological movement in the Christian Roman Empire during the fourth and fifth centuries B.C.E.. The conflict between Arianism and standard Trinitarian beliefs was the first major doctrinal battle in the Christian church after the legalization of Christianity by Emperor Constantine I. Named after an Alexandrian priest named Arius, Arianism spawned a great controversy that divided the Roman Empire and defined the limits of Christian orthodoxy for centuries to come.

File:Nicaea.jpg

Bishops debate Arianism at the First Council of Nicea.

The controversy involved not only emperors, priests, and bishops, but simple believers throughout the Christian empire. Bitter disputes among popular church leaders led to mob violence and political turmoil, and thus Emperor Constantine was moved to convene the First Ecumenical Council at Nicea in 325. The Nicean Creed rejected the tenets of Arianism, but did not put an end to the controversy. Constantine eventually reversed his position, pardoned Arius, and sent his main opponent, Athanasius of Alexandria, into exile. Later fourth century emperors supported Arianism, but in the end, the Athanasian view prevailed and has since been the virtually uncontested doctrine in all major branches of Christianity.

Arius taught that although God the Son indeed pre-existed as a divine being before the creation of the Universe, he was not "co-eternal" with God the Father. The opposite position, championed by Athanasius, held that the Father and Son existed together with the Holy Spirit from the beginning. A further disagreement involved the question of whether the Son and the Father were of the "same substance," or not.

Arianism was the first form of Christianity to make major inroads with the Germanic tribes, and many of the "barbarians" who conquered Rome were actually Arian Christians. As a result of Arianism being successfully taught to the Germanic tribes by the missionary Ulfilas, Arian Christianity lingered for several centuries in western Europe.

Beliefs

Since Arius' writings were burned, few of his actual words are available. In one of the only surviving lines thought to express his own words, he states:

God has not always been Father; there was a moment when he was alone, and was not yet Father: later he became so. The Son is not from eternity; he came from nothing.

This statement is preserved by Arius' vehement opponent, Athanasius. However, nearly all sources agree that Arianism affirmed God's original existence as a solitary Being, rather than being a Trinity from the beginning. The "begetting" or "generation" of the Son may have been in a moment "before time," but in Arius' view, the begetting itself proved that God was once alone and therefore not yet the Father. In the above statement, Arius also affirmed that the Son was created from nothing — ex nihilo — just as the rest of creation. Therefore the Son could not be of the same substance as God the Father. This issue gave rise to three Greek expressions that are difficult for English readers to distinguish, but were at the root of bitter, sometimes violent controversies:

• anomoios — dissimilar in nature/substance (the conservative Arian position)
• homoousios — of the same nature/substance (the Athanasian position)
• homoiousios — of similar nature/substance (the position of moderate Arians and semi-Arians)

Traditional Arianism

Strict Arians condemned the term homoousios, but also rejected "homoiousios" as conceding too much, insisting instead on the term "anomoios."

A letter from the later fourth century Arian bishop of Milan, Auxentius (d. 374) still survives. [1] It speaks of:

"One true God... alone unbegotten, without beginning, without end, eternal, exalted, sublime, excellent, most high creator, epitome of all excellence... who, being alone... did create and beget, make and establish, an only-begotten God [Christ].

Although Christ thus did not always exist with God the Father, he is nevertheless a pre-existent being, the Second Person of the Trinity, and the agent of creation. Christ is described as:

Author of all things [made to exist] by the Father, after the Father, for the Father, and for the glory of the Father... He was both great God and great Lord and great King, and great Mystery, great Light and High Priest, the providing and law-giving Lord, Redeemer, Savior, Shepherd, born before all time, Creator of all creation.

Auxentius went on to praise the efforts of the great Germanic Arian missionary Ulfilas in tones that provide a glimpse into the bitter antagonism between the Arian, Anthanasian, and semi-Arian parties:

In his preaching and exposition he asserted that all heretics were not Christians, but Antichrists; not pious, but impious; not religious, but irreligious; not timid but bold; not in hope but without hope; not worshipers of God, but without God, not teachers, but seducers; not preachers, but liars; be they Manichaeans, Marcinonists, Montanists, Paulinians, Psabbelians, Antropians, Patripassians, Photinans, Novatians, Donatians, Homoousians, (or) Homoiousians.

Auxentius also preserved the creed that Ulfilas taught to his converts. It is likely that many of the Arian Christians among the Germanic tribes adhered to this confession, or something like it:

I believe that there is only one God the Father, alone unbegotten and invisible, and in His only-begotten Son, our Lord and God, creator and maker of all things, not having any like unto Him... And I believe in one Holy Spirit, an enlightening and sanctifying power...[who is] neither God nor Lord, but the faithful minister of Christ; not equal, but subject and obedient in all things to the Son. And I believe the Son to be subject and obedient in all things to God the Father."

Semi-Arian Creeds

Several other Arian and semi-Arian creeds also circulated. A council of bishops held at Antioch in 341 endorsed a compromise formula representing the semi-Arian stance and side-stepping the question of "like substance" vs. "same substance." It is known as the Creed of the Dedication:

We have not been followers of Arius, — how could Bishops, such as we, follow a Presbyter? — nor did we receive any other faith beside that which has been handed down from the beginning... We have been taught from the first to believe in one God, the God of the Universe, the Framer and Preserver of all things both intellectual and sensible. And in One Son of God, Only-begotten, who existed before all ages, and was with the Father who had begotten Him, by whom all things were made, both visible and invisible... And we believe also in the Holy Ghost; and if it be necessary to add, we believe concerning the resurrection of the flesh, and the life everlasting.[2]

In the process of battling Arianism and enforcing the destruction of Arian works, Athanasius himself ironically became history's main source of information on Arianism. His De Synodis [3] in particular preserves many of the Arian and semi-Arian creeds adopted by various church councils.

The History of Arianism

Arius reportedly learned his doctrine from an Antiochan presbyter (priest/elder) and later martyr named Lucius. Arius spread these ideas in Alexandria and was appointed a deacon in that city by its bishop, Peter. Controversy ensued, and Arius was briefly excommunicated, but was soon reconciled with Peter's successor, Achillas, who promoted him to the position of presbyter, providing him authority as a teacher of church doctrine. A persuasive orator and gifted poet, Arius' influence grew steadily. However, he gained the enmity of another new bishop, Alexander, and in 321 Arius was denounced by the local synod for teaching a heterodox view of the relationship of God the Son to God the Father.

Despite this setback, Arius and his followers already had great influence in the schools of Alexandria, and when he was forced into exile, his views spread to Palestine, Syria, and other parts of the eastern Mediterranean. His theological theological songs and poems, published in his book, Thalia, were widely recited. Many bishops soon accepted Arius' ideas, including the influential Eusebius of Nicomedia, who had the ear no less a personage than the Emperor himself.

Nicea and its aftermath

Icon depicting Emperor Constantine and anti-Arianist bishops with the Nicene creed.

Constantine's hopes that Christianity would serve as a unifying force in the empire, meanwhile, faced frustration. By 325, the Arian controversy had become significant enough that he called an assembly of bishops, the First Council of Nicea. Reports vary, but the church historian Eusebius of Caesaria indicated that the Emperor expressed his support of the the term homoousios. Arius' views may have been losing the day in any case, but once the Emperor weighed in, the Arian cause was hopeless. The council condemned Arianism and formulated the Nicene creed, which is still recited in Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, and some Protestant services.

...God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God;

begotten, not made, being of one substance (homoousios) with the Father.

In its original version, the creed added the following statement in more overt opposition to Arianism:

But those who say: "There was a time when he was not"; and "He was not before he was made"; and "He was made out of nothing"; or "He is of another substance" or "essence"... they are condemned by the holy Catholic and apostolic Church.

Constantine exiled those who refused to accept the creed — including Arius himself and several others. He also exiled the bishops who signed the creed but refused to join condemning Arius — notably Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nicea. The Emperor also ordered all copies of the Thalia, the book in which Arius had expressed his teachings, to be burned. This ended the open theological debate for several years, but under the surface, opposition to the Nicean creed remained strong, especially in the east.

Eventually Constantine became convinced that the homoousios was an ill-advised and divisive term. It the previous century, it had been previously condemned by several church councils because of its association with the teaching of the heretic Paul of Samosata. Otherwise orthodox bishops, espeically in the East, therefore adamantyly rejected the term. Concerned to bring peace to the Empire, Constantine became more lenient toward those exiled at the council. He allowed Theognis of Nicea and Eusebius of Nicomedia, a protégé of his sister, to return once they had signed an ambiguous statement of faith. The two, together with other friends of Arius, then began to work for Arius' rehabilitation.

At the synod of Tyre in 335, they brought accusations against Arius' nemesis, Athanasius, now the powerful bishop of Alexandria. Constantine had Athanasius banished, considering him intransigent and an impediment to reconciliation. In the same year, the synod of Jerusalem readmitted Arius to communion, and in 336, Constantine allowed Arius to return to his hometown. Arius, however, soon died. Eusebius and Theognis remained in the Emperor's favor.

When Constantine, who had been an unbaptized believer much of his adult life, accepted baptism on his deathbed, it was from the semi-Arian bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia.

The Debates Reopen

Arianism and semi-Arianism prospered under the 24-year reign of Constantius II, shown above. They struggled during the reign of Julilan the Apostate, and regained a favored position under Valens.

The Nicean terminology was proving insufficient. After Constantine's death in 337, open dispute resumed again. Eusebius of Nicomedia, who had been made bishop of Constantinople, became an adviser to Constantine's son Constantius II, then emperor of the Eastern half of the Empire. Constantius encouraged the anti-Nicene groups and set out to revise the Nicene creed itself. He proceeded to exile bishops adhering to the creed, including Athanasius, who fled to Rome. In 355 Constantius became the sole Emperor and extended his pro-Arian policy to the western provinces. When the Bishop of Rome, Liberius, refused to sign a denunciation of Athanasius, Constantius forced him into exile for a period of two years, the first instance a long struggle in which the Roman church would emerge — in its view — as the champion of orthodoxy in the face of royal error.

As debates raged in an attempt to come up with a new formula, three camps evolved among the opponents of the Nicene Creed.

• The first group opposed the Nicene formula mainly because of the term homoousios, which they had long rejected as heretical even before the advent of the Arian controversy. They preferred the term homoiousios. They rejected Arius, and accepted the equality and co-eternality of the Three Persons of the Trinity. However, they were usually called "semi-Arians" by their opponents.

• The second group — called both Arians and semi-Arians — in large part followed his teachings but avoided invoking his name. In another compromise wording, described the Son as being "like" the Father (homoios).

• A third, overtly Arian, group described the Son as unlike (anhomoios) the Father and condemned the compromisers as heretics.

Constantius wavered in his support between the first and the second party, while rejecting the third. The ensuing debates resulted in numerous synods, most notably the twin councils of Rimini(Italy) and Seleucia (Turkey) in 359-360, with no less than fourteen further creedal formulas adopted in the process. The pagan observer Ammianus Marcellinus commented sarcastically: "The highways were covered with galloping bishops." However, since none of these attempts accepted the homoousios, defenders of Nicene orthodoxy now risked expulsion. Writing about the councils of Rimini and Seluecia, Saint Jerome remarked that the world "awoke with a groan to find itself Arian."

After Constantius' death in 361, Bishop Liberius of Rome declared the above-mentioned councils null and void. Meanwhile, Constantius' successor Julian the Apostate, a devotee of paganism, declared that the empire would no longer favor one church faction over another. He allowed all exiled bishops to return.

The next emperor, Valens, however, revived Constantius' policy and supported the "Homoian" party, exiling opposing bishops and often using force. Many Nicene bishops were exiled to the other ends of the Empire, most notablyHilarius of Poitiers. These contacts, paradoxically, contributed to a rapprochement between the Western supporters of the Nicene creed and the Eastern semi-Arians.

Theodosius and the Council of Constantinople

The tide turned decisively against Arianism when Valens died in battle in 378 and was succeeded by Theodosius I, who strongly adhered to the Nicene Creed. Two days after Theodosius arrived in Constantinople, on November 24, 380, he expelled the Homoian bishop, Demophilus of Constantinople, and gave the supervision of the churches of that city to the future Bishop Gregory of Nazianzus, the leader of the rather small Nicene community there, an act which provoked rioting. Theodosius had recently been baptized during a severe illness, as was common in the early Christian world. In February he published an edict ordering that all Roman subjects should profess the faith of the bishops of Rome and Alexandria (i.e., the Nicene faith).

In 381, at the Second Ecumenical Council in Constantinople, a group of mainly Eastern bishops assembled and accepted the Nicene Creed. This is generally considered the end of Arianism among the non-Germanic peoples. At the close of this council, Theodosius issued an imperial decree ordering that any non-conforming churches would be turned over pro-Nicene bishops. Although many in the church hierarchy in the East had opposed the Nicene creed in the decades leading up to Theodosius' accession, he managed to impose unity by a combination of force and effective administration.

Arianism in the Germanic kingdoms

During the time of Arianism's flowering in Constantinople, the Goth convert Ulfilas was sent as a missionary to the Gothic barbarians across the Danube, a mission supported for political reasons by Constantius II. Ulfilas' initial success in converting this Germanic people to an Arian form of Christianity was strengthened by the fact that Arianism was favored by the contemporary emperors.

Alaric I, who conquered Rome in 410 B.C.E.., was an Arian Christian.

When the Germanic peoples entered the Roman Empire and founded successor-kingdoms in its western part, most had been Arian Christians for more than a century. These Gothic Arians established Arian churches throughout much of the former western Roman empire. Parallel hierarchies served different sets of believers — the Germanic elites being Arians, while the majority population adhered to the Nicene creed.

While most Germanic tribes were tolerant regarding the trinitarian beliefs of their subjects, the Vandals tried for several decades to force their Arian belief on their North African trinitarian subjects, exiling trinitarian clergy, dissolving monasteries, and exercising heavy pressure on non-conforming Christians. For more information on these Arian kingdoms, see the articles on the Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Vandals, Burgundians, and Lombards.

The Germanic Arian tribes tended to be less adamant in their faith than Nicene Christians, and the orthodox party possessed advantages in literacy and the sophistication of their Christian culture. By the beginning of the 8th century, the Arian kingdoms had either been conquered (e.g. Ostrogoths, Vandals, Burgundians) by Nicene neighbors, or their rulers had accepted Nicene Christianity voluntarily (e.g. Visigoths, Lombards). The Franks were unique among the Germanic peoples in that they entered the empire as pagans and converted to Nicene Christianity directly.

Later "Arianism"

In many ways, the conflict around Arian beliefs in the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries helped firmly define the centrality of the Trinity in mainstream Christian theology. As the first major intra-Christian conflict after Christianity's legalization, the struggle between Nicenes and Arians left a deep impression on the institutional memory of Nicene churches. Thus, over the past 1,500 years, some Christians have used the term Arian to refer to those groups that see themselves as worshiping Jesus Christ or respecting his teachings, but who place Jesus in a subservient position to God.

In 1553, the Spanish scholar and Protestant reformer Michael Servetus, who is viewed by many Unitarians as a founding figure, was sentenced to death and burned at the stake by his fellow reformers, including John Calvin, for the heresy of Antitrinitarianism, a Christology that is similar in many ways to Arianism.

Like the Arians, many more recent groups have embraced the belief that Jesus is not the one God, but a separate being subordinate to the Father, and that Jesus at one time did not exist. Some of these profess, as the Arians did, that God made all things through the pre-existent Christ. Some profess that Jesus became divine through his obedience to God. Despite the frequency with which Arianism is used to describe such groups, there has been no historically continuous survival of Arianism into the modern era, nor do the groups so labeled do not hold beliefs identical to Arianism. For this reason, they do not use the name as a self-description, even when they acknowledge that their beliefs are at points in agreement with Arianism.

Those whose religious beliefs have been compared to or labeled as Arianism include:

• Unitarians, who believe that God is one, as opposed to a Trinity, and many of whom believe in the moral authority, but not the deity, of Jesus.
• Jehovah's Witnesses, who — like Arius — teach that Jesus had a pre-human existence as the Logos, but not as the Second Person of the Trinity. However, Arius viewed the Holy Spirit as a person, whereas Jehovah's Witnesses do not attribute personality to the spirit.
• Christadelphians, who believe that Jesus' pre-natal existence was as a conceptual Logos, rather than a literal Logos.
• Followers of the various churches of the Latter Day Saint movement, who believe in the unity in purpose of the Godhead but teach that Jesus is a divine being distinct from from the Trinity.
• Unificationists, who believe that Jesus incarnated the Logos, but who also affirm that God existed alone before conceiving his Ideal of Creation.
• Muslims, who believe that Jesus was a prophet of the one God, but not himself divine.

See also

• Arius (Presbyter of Alexandria (256 - 336 C.E.))
• Arian Catholicism
• Germanic Christianity
• Protestantism
• Semi-Arianism
• Anomoean, extreme sect of pure Arians
• Christology

Bibliography

• Athanasius of Alexandria, History of the Arians Part I Part II Part III Part IV Part V Part VI Part VII Part VIII
• Ivor J. Davidson, A Public Faith, Volume 2 of Baker History of the Church, 2005, ISBN 0801012759
• J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, 1978, ISBN 006064334X
• William C. Rusch, The Trinitarian Controversy, (Sources of Early Christian Thought), 1980, ISBN 0800614100
• John Henry Newman, Arians of the Fourth Century, 1871
• Schaff, Philip Theological Controversies and the Development of Orthodoxy, History of the Christian Church, Vol III, Ch. IX
• Williams, Rowan, Arius: Heresy and Tradition, rev. edn. 2001, ISBN 0802849695

External links

• CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Arianism
• Holy Arian Catholic and Apostolic Church (Arian Catholic viewpoint)
• Believe: Arianism
• Jewish Encyclopedia: Arianism

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

• Arianism  ^history

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

• History of "Arianism"

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.