Arian controversy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Arian controversy describes several controversies which divided the Christian church from before the Council of Nicaea in 325 to after the Council of Constantinople in 383. The most important of these controversies concerned the relationship between the Creator and Logos, or between God the Father and God the Son.

Part of a series of articles on Arianism

History and Theology Arius · Acacians · Anomoeanism · Arian controversy · First Council of Nicaea · Lucian of Antioch · Gothic Christianity Arian leaders Acacius of Caesarea · Aëtius · Demophilus of Constantinople · Eudoxius of Antioch · Eunomius of Cyzicus · Eusebius of Caesarea · Eusebius of Nicomedia · Eustathius of Sebaste · George of Laodicea · Ulfilas Other Arians Asterius the Sophist · Auxentius of Milan · Auxentius of Durostorum · Constantius II · Wereka and Batwin · Fritigern · Alaric I · Artemius · Odoacer · Theodoric the Great Modern semi-Arians Samuel Clarke · Isaac Newton · William Whiston Opponents of Arianism Peter of Alexandria · Achillas of Alexandria · Alexander of Alexandria · Hosius of Cordoba · Athanasius of Alexandria · Paul I of Constantinople · Christianity portal This box: view • talk • edit

Contents 1 History 1.1 Origins of the controversy 1.1.1 Lucian of Antioch 1.2 The controversy begins 1.3 The Council of Nicaea (325) 1.4 Ariminum, Seleucia, and Constantinople (358-360) 1.5 The controversy in the 360s 1.6 The Council of Constantinople (383) 1.7 Councils involved 2 Issues 2.1 Is the Logos created? 2.2 Was the Logos created in time? 2.3 Personhood of the Holy Spirit 2.4 Other Issues 2.4.1 Dates of Passover and Easter 2.4.2 Marriage 3 Sides 3.1 Homoousian 3.2 Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium 3.3 Homoiousian 3.4 Homoian 3.5 Heteroousian 3.6 Other critics of the Creed of Nicaea 3.7 Unclassified 4 See also 5 References 6 External links

[edit] History

Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (June 2008)

[edit] Origins of the controversy

Further information: Synods of Antioch

Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (June 2008)

[edit] Lucian of Antioch

Main article: Lucian of Antioch

This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. (August 2007)

It is believed that Arius' doctrines were influenced by the teachings of Lucian of Antioch, a celebrated Christian teacher and martyr for the faith. In a letter to Bishop Alexander of Constantinople, Alexander of Alexandria wrote that Arius derived his theology from Lucian. The express purpose of his letter is to complain of the doctrines Arius was then diffusing but his charge of heresy against Arius is vague and unsupported by other authorities, and Alexander's language, like that of most controversialists in those days, is vituperative. Moreover, Lucian is not stated, even by Alexander himself, to have fallen into the heresy afterwards promulgated by Arius, but is accused ad invidiam of heretical tendencies.

[edit] The controversy begins

The early history of the controversy must be pieced together from about 35 documents found in various sources. The historian Socrates of Constantinople reports that Arius first became controversial under the bishop Achillas of Alexandria, when he made the following syllogism: he said, "‘If the Father begat the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence: and from this it is evident, that there was a time when the Son was not. It therefore necessarily follows, that he had his substance from nothing.’"

The patriarch of Alexandria was the subject of adverse criticism for his slow reaction against Arius. Like his predecessor Dionysius, he has been charged with vacillation. Yet it is difficult to see how he could have acted otherwise than he did. The question that Arius raised had been left unsettled two generations previously, or, if in any sense it could be said to have been settled, it had been settled in favour of the opponents of the homoousion. Therefore Alexander allowed the controversy to continue until he felt that it had become dangerous to the peace of the Church. Then he called a council of bishops and sought their advice. Once they decided against Arius, Alexander delayed no longer. He deposed Arius from his office, and excommunicated both him and his supporters.

[edit] The Council of Nicaea (325)

Main article: Council of Nicaea

[edit] Ariminum, Seleucia, and Constantinople (358-360)

Main articles: Council of Rimini, Council of Seleucia, and First Council of Constantinople (360)

In 358, the emperor Constantius II requested two councils, one of the western bishops at Ariminum and one of the eastern bishops at Nicomedia.^[1][2]

In 359, the western council met at Ariminum. Ursacius of Singidunum and Valens of Mursa declared that the Son was like the father "according to the scriptures," following a new (Homoian) creed drafted at Sirmium (359). Many of the most outspoken supporters of the Creed of Nicaea walked out. The council, including some supporters of the older creed, adopted the newer creed.^[3][4] After the council, Pope Liberius condemned the creed of Ariminum, while his rival, Felix, supported it.^[5]

An earthquake struck Nicomedia, killing the bishop Cecropius of Nicomedia, and in 359 the eastern council met at Seleucia instead. The council was bitterly divided, and procedurally irregular, and the two parties met separately and reached opposing decisions. Basil of Ancyra and his party declared that the Son was of similar substance to the Father, following a (Homoiousian) Creed of Antioch from 341, and deposed the opposing party. Acacius of Caesarea declared that the Son was like the Father, introducing a new (Homoian) creed.^[6][7]

Constantius requested a third council, at Constantinople (359), of both the eastern and western bishops, to resolve the split at Seleucia. Acacius now declared that the Son was like the Father "according to the scriptures." Basil of Ancyra, Eustathius of Sebaste, and their party again declared that the Son was of similar substance to the Father, as in the majority decision at Seleucia. Maris of Chalcedon, Eudoxius of Antioch, and the deacons Aëtius and Eunomius declared that the Son was of a dissimilar substance from the Father.^[8][9] The Heteroousians defeated the Homoiousians in an initial debate, but Constantius banished Aëtius,^[10] after which the council, including Maris and Eudoxius,^[11] agreed to the homoian creed of Ariminum with minor modifications.^[12][13]

After the Council of Constantinople, the homoian bishop Acacius deposed and banished several homoiousian bishops, including Macedonius I of Constantinople, Basil, Eustathius, Eleusius of Cyzicus, Dracontius of Pergamum, Neonas of Seleucia, Sophronius of Pompeiopolis, Elpidius of Satala and Cyril of Jerusalem.^[14][15] At the same time, Acacius also deposed and banished the Anomoean deacon Aëtius.^[16]

In 360, Acacius appointed Eudoxius of Antioch to replace Macedonius and Athanasius of Ancyra to replace Basil, as well as Onesimus of Nicomedia to replace Cecropius, who had died in the earthquake at Nicomedia.^[17]

[edit] The controversy in the 360s

In 361, Constantius died and Julian the Apostate became sole Roman emperor. Julian demanded the restoration of several pagan temples which Christians had seized or destroyed.^[18] According to Philostorgius, pagans killed George of Laodicea, bishop of Alexandria, allowing Athanasius of Alexandria to reclaim the see.^[19]

[edit] The Council of Constantinople (383)

[edit] Councils involved

Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (June 2008)

Several church councils were largely, if not primarily, concerned with the Arian controversy. These include:

• Synods of Antioch 264-269, councils rejected the term homoousios
• Egyptian Council of Alexandria (318 or 319).^[20][21]
• Council of the party of Alexander of Alexandria at Nicomedia (c. 325).^[22]
• Council of the party of Alexander of Alexandria at Antioch (325).^{[citation needed][23]}
• Council of Nicaea (more than 300 bishops) (325).^[24][25][26]
• Church trial of Eustathius of Antioch at Antioch (c. 330).^[27][28]
• Council of Nicomedia (250 bishops) (c. 335).^[29]
• Church trial of Athanasius of Alexandria at Tyre (335).^[30][31][32]
• Council of Jerusalem (335).^[33][34]
• Church trial of Marcellus of Ancyra at Constantinople (336).^[35][36]
• Church trial of Athanasius of Alexandria at Antioch (338).^{[citation needed][37]}
• Council of Antioch (Council of the Dedication) (90 bishops) (341).^[38][39]
• Another Council of Antioch (341).^[40][41]
• Western Council of Rome (342).^{[citation needed]}
• Mostly Western Council of Sardica (342 or 343).^[42][43]
• Eastern Council of Philippopolis (342 or 343).^[44][45]
• Eastern Council of Antioch (344).^{[citation needed][46]}
• Regional Council of Jerusalem.^[47]
• Mostly Western Council of Mediolanum (345).^{[citation needed][48]}
• Mostly Western Council of Mediolanum (347).^{[citation needed][49]}
• Council of Sirmium (347).^{[citation needed]}
• Egyptian Council of Alexandria (c. 351).^[50]
• Council of Sirmium and church trial of Photinus at Sirmium (351).^[51][52]
• Council of Arelate (353).^{[citation needed][53]}
• Mostly Western Council of Mediolanum (more than 300 bishops) (355).^[54][55]
• Council of Sirmium (357).^[56][57]
• Council of Ancyra (358).^{[citation needed][58]}
• Fourth Council of Sirmium (359).^{[citation needed][59]}
• Western Council of Ariminum (about 300 or more than 400 bishops) (359).^[60][61][62]
• Eastern Council of Seleucia (about 160 bishops) (359).^[63][64][65]
• Council of the Homoians at Nike (c. 359).^[66]
• First Council of Constantinople (360) (360).^[67][68][69]
• Church trial of Eunomius of Cyzicus at Constantinople (c. 360).^[70]
• Church trial of Eustathius of Sebaste at Gangra.^[71]
• Council of the Anomoeans in Constantinople (c. 361).^[72]
• Local council at Constantinople (c. 361).^[73]
• Council of Antioch (361).^{[citation needed][74]}
• Council of the Anomoeans in Constantinople (c. 363).^[75]
• Council of the party of Theodosius of Lydia (c. 363 or 364).^[76]
• Local council at Antioch (c. 381).^[77]
• Council of Constantinople (381 or 383).^[78]
• Council of Toledo (Of the churches in Hispania) (589).

[edit] Issues

Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (June 2008)

[edit] Is the Logos created?

Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (June 2008)

[edit] Was the Logos created in time?

Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (June 2008)

[edit] Personhood of the Holy Spirit

Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (June 2008)

This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. (April 2008)

Dominating the secular intellectual milieu in which the Cappadocians lived was Platonism, which, when mixed with unreflective Christian theology, bred Arianism, the most prominent heresy at the dawn of the fourth century. According to Platonism, the One or “first cause” radiated immaterial and material entities in a hierarchical, categorized way. If this conceptualization had remained unchecked, the Christian God could have been given a Platonic veneer: the Father as the “first cause,” the Son or Logos as the primary emanation from the One, and the Spirit as a further emanation of the Logos. Arianism held that the Son of God was a being created by the First Person and could not be considered divine, an attractive option incorporating both classical Greek thought and the historical event of the person of Jesus. The Cappadocians vehemently argued against Arianism for its inequality among the divine Persons: “This was the disease of Arius, who gave his name to the madness, and who threw into confusion and brought to ruin a great part of the Church. Without honoring the Father, he dishonored what proceeded from Him by maintaining unequal degrees in the Godhead. But we recognize one glory of the Father, the equality of the Only-begotten, and one glory of the Son, the equality of the Holy Spirit. And we believe that to subordinate anything of the Three is to destroy the whole” (Gregory of Nazianzus, On St. Basil, par. 30.). The Cappadocian insistence on equality among the divine Persons was also a solid refutation of the hierarchical ordering of the cosmos found in Platonism.

According to a heresy^{[neutrality disputed]} related to Arianism, Anomoianism, the Spirit was subjugated to the Father and the Son. As time went on, arguing for the divinity of the Spirit became increasingly more important to the Cappadocians. Nicaea left rather open the question of the divinity of the Spirit; belief “in the Holy Spirit” was all the bishops had stated. Advocating for the divinity of the Holy Spirit was crucial for the Cappadocians exactly because of their insistence on the unity and equality of the Three: “The central thrust of Basil’s positive argument in favor of the Spirit’s deity is the non-separability of the three persons and the inference from this that they are all three worthy of this same honor” Anthony Meredith, The Cappadocians (Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1995), 32).

The Cappadocians’ insistence on three co-equal divine Persons, however, subjected them to accusations of tritheism. The extreme opposite, Sabellianism, also widespread at that time, conflated the three Persons into one and saw no distinctions among them whatsoever. The theologians, therefore, had to articulate the unity of the divine essence as well as the distinctness of Persons in the Godhead.

As time went on and in response to continual controversy, the Cappadocians’ theological writings increased in nuance and also in clarity. What emerged from them was the orthodox Christian belief that God is a unity of Three distinct yet inseparable and equal Persons. The Cappadocian theologians worked out this theology by establishing the distinctness of the divine Persons, the communitarian relationships of the Three, and the unity of their divine essence.

This section submitted by Claire Anderson, M.Div.

[edit] Other Issues

Several other issues arose at the same time as the Arian controversy proper.

[edit] Dates of Passover and Easter

Main article: Quartodecimanism

In Christianity, Easter is the Sunday and Monday after Passover. However, it was debated whether to follow Jewish practice for the calculation of the date of Passover. By the 4th century, the most common Christian methods had diverged from the most common Jewish ones.^[79]

[edit] Marriage

Many held that presbyters and bishops should not marry, and some held that presbyters and bishops who had already married, and their wives, should refrain from sex.^[80]

Eustathius of Sebaste condemned marriage entirely; he also excluded married presbyters from communion, forbade married Christians from praying at home while encouraging unmarried ones to hold services at home; he was deposed for this and his doctrines were condemned.^[81]

[edit] Sides

Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (June 2008)

[edit] Homoousian

See also: Homoousion

The Homoousians taught that the Son is of the same substance as the Father, i.e. both uncreated. The Sabellian form had been condemned as heresy in the 3rd century. The Athanasian form would be declared orthodox at the Council of Constantinople in 383, and has become the basis of most of modern trinitarianism.^[82]

• Alexander, bishop of Alexandria (313-326).^[83]
• Hosius, bishop of Cordoba (?-(359).^[84]
• Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea (c. 313-339).^[85]
• Eustathius, (possibly Sabellian) bishop of Antioch (c. 325-330).^[86]
• Cyrus, (possibly Sabellian) bishop of Beroe.^[87]
• Athanasius (Athanasian) bishop of Alexandria (326-373, later rival of Gregory of Cappadocia and then George of Laodicea).^[88]
• Paul, bishop of Constantinople (336-351, later rival of Eusebius of Nicomedia and then Macedonius I of Constantinople).^[89]
• Julius, bishop of Rome (337-352).^[90]
• Asclepas, bishop of Gaza.^[91]
• Lucius, bishop of Adrianople (?-351).^[92]
• Maximus, bishop of Jerusalem (333-350).^[93]
• Paulinus, bishop of Treves, who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.^[94]
• Dionysius, bishop of Alba, who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.^[95]
• Eusebius, bishop of Vercelli (340-371), who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.^[96]
• Angelius, (Novatian) bishop of Constantinople.^[97]

• Gregory of Nazianzus^{[citation needed]}
• Gregory of Elvira^{[citation needed]}
• Lucifer, bishop of Cagliari.^{[citation needed]}
• Hilary, bishop of Poitiers (c. 353-367).^{[citation needed]}
• Servatius, bishop of Tongeren.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium

This article or section is missing information about: Eusebius' criticisms of Marcellus' theology, Athanasius' defense of Marcellus, and modern scholarly research on these figures. This concern has been noted on the talk page where it may be discussed whether or not to include such information. (March 2008)

According to the historian Socrates of Constantinople, Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium taught "that Christ was a mere man."^[98] Their opponents associated the teachings of Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium with those of Sabellius and Paul of Samosata, which had been widely rejected before the controversy.^[99]

• Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra (?-336 and c. 343-c. 374) and critic of Asterius.^[100]
• Photinus, bishop of Sirmium (?-351) and in exile (351-376); according to Socrates of Constantinople and Sozomen, Photinus was a follower of Marcellus.^[101]

• In 336, a church trial at Constantinople deposed Marcellus and condemned his doctrines.^[102]
• Pope Julius I supported Marcellus and called for his restoration.^[103]
• In 342 or 343, the mostly Western Council of Sardica restored Marcellus, while the mostly Eastern Council of Philippopolis sustained his removal.^[104]
• Under pressure from his co-Emperor Constans, Constantius II initially backed the decision of Sardica, but after Constans' death, reversed course.^[105]
• In 351,^{[citation needed]} a church trial at the Council of Sirmium deposed Photinus and condemned his teachings.^[106]
• The Macrostich condemned the teachings of Marcellus and Photinus.^[107]

[edit] Homoiousian

The Homoiousian school taught that the Son is of a similar substance to the Father.^[108][109]

• Basil of Ancyra, bishop of Ancyra (336-360).^[110][111]
• Macedonius, (Macedonian) bishop of Constantinople (342-346 and 351-360).^[112][113]
• George of Laodicea, bishop of Alexandria (356-361, rival of Athanasius of Alexandria).^[114][115]
• Eudoxius, bishop of Germanicia (?-358), Antioch (358-359), and Constantinople (360-370), who supported the Macrostich.^[116][117]
• Martyrius, who supported the Macrostich.^[118]
• Macedonius, bishop of Mopsuestia, who supported the Macrostich.^[119]
• Mark, bishop of Arethusa, who wrote the Creed of Sirmium of 351.^[120]
• Cyril, (Macedonian) bishop of Jerusalem (350-386).^[121]
• Marathonius, (Macedonian) bishop of Nicomedia (c. 351-?).^[122]
• Eleusius, (Macedonian) bishop of Cyzicus (c. 351-360).^[123][124]
• Sophronius, (Macedonian) bishop of Pompeiopolis (?-360).^[125]
• Dracontius, bishop of Pergamum (?-360).^[126]
• Neonas, bishop of Seleucia (?-360).^[127]
• Elpidius, bishop of Satala (?-360).^[128]
• Eustathius, (Macedonian) bishop of Sebastia.^[129][130]
• Annianus of Antioch.^[131]
• Sabinus, Macedonian bishop of Heraclea.^[132]

[edit] Homoian

See also: Acacians

The Homoians taught that the Son is similar to the Father, either "in all things" or "according to the scriptures," without speaking of substance.^[133] Several members of the other schools, such as Hosius of Cordoba and Aëtius, also accepted certain Homoian formulae.^[134]

• Ursacius, initially homoiousian, then homoousian, and later homoian bishop of Singidunum, who had opposed Athanasius.^[135]
• Valens, initially homoiousian, then homoousian, and later homoian bishop of Mursa, who had opposed Athanasius.^[136]
• Germinius.^[137]
• Auxentius (d. 374), bishop of Milan.^[138]
• Demophilus, bishop of Beraea (?-370) and Constantinople (370-380).^[139][140]
• Gaius.^[141]
• Acacius, bishop of Caesarea (340-366).^[142]

[edit] Heteroousian

See also: Anomoeanism

The Heteroousians taught that the Son is of a different substance from the Father, i.e. created. Arius had taught this early in the controversy, and Aëtius would teach the later Anomoean form.^[143][144]

• Arius, presbyter in Alexandria.^[145]
• Theophilus the Indian, who later supported Aëtius.^[146]
• Aëtius, who founded the Anomoean tradition, later bishop (361-?).^[147][148]
• Theodulus, (Anomoean) bishop of Chaeretapa (?-c. 363) and Palestine (c. 363-c. 379).^[149][150]
• Eunomius, (Anomoean) bishop of Cyzicus (360-361) and exiled bishop (361-c. 393).^[151][152]
• Paemenius, (Anomoean) bishop of Constantinople, (c. 363, at the same time as Eudoxius of Antioch).^[153]
• Candidus, (Anomoean) bishop of Lydia, (c. 363-?).^[154]
• Arrianus, (Anomoean) bishop of Ionia, (c. 363-?).^[155]
• Florentius, (Anomoean) bishop of Constantinople, (c. 363-?, at the same time as Eudoxius of Antioch).^[156]
• Thallus, (Anomoean) bishop of Lesbos, (c. 363-?, at the same time as Eudoxius of Antioch).^[157]
• Euphronius, (Anomoean) bishop of Galatia, the Black Sea and Cappadocia, (c. 363-?).^[158]
• Julian, (Anomoean) bishop of Cilicia, (c. 363-?).^[159]
• Serras, Stephen, and Heliodorus, (Anomoean) bishops of Egypt, (c. 363-?).^[160]
• Philostorgius, (Anomoean) historian.

[edit] Other critics of the Creed of Nicaea

Many critics of the "Nicene" Creed cannot be clearly associated with one school, often due to lack of sources, or due to contradictions between sources.

• Secundus, bishop of Ptolemais, who supported Arius at Nicaea.^{[161][162][163]}
• Theonus, bishop of Marmarica, who supported Arius at Nicaea.^{[164][165][166]}
• Eusebius, bishop of Berytus, Nicomedia (?-325 and 328-338) and Constantinople (338-341, rival of Paul I of Constantinople), who supported Arius at Nicaea.^[167][168]
• Theognis, bishop of Nicaea, who supported Arius at Nicaea.^[169][170]
• Maris, bishop of Chalcedon, who supported Arius at Nicaea.^[171][172]
• Eusebius, (possibly Homoiousian, possibly Sabellian) bishop of Emesa (c. 339 or 341).^[173]
• Gregory of Cappadocia, bishop of Alexandria (339-346, rival of Athanasius of Alexandria).^[174]
• Narcissus, bishop of Neronias.^[175]
• Stephanus, bishop of Antioch (342-344).^[176]
• Leontius, bishop of Antioch (344-358), who also taught Aetius.^[177][178]
• Patrophilus of Scythopolis.^[179]

• Asterius (d. c. 341), who, according to Socrates of Constantinople, considered Jesus as example of the power of God, and according to Philostorgius, defended the Homoiousian tradition.^[180][181]
• Athanasius of Anazarbus, who taught Aetius.^[182]
• Wulfila (d. 383), first bishop of the Goths (341?-c.383), and Bible translator, who agreed to the Homoian formula at Constantinople.^[183][184]
• Wereka and Batwin, papa and bilaifs respectively, and Gothic martyrs.
• Auxentius of Durostorum, later bishop of Milan, Wulfila's adopted son.^[185]
• Palladius, bishop of Ratiaria.^[186]
• Secundianus, bishop of Singidunum.^[187]

[edit] Unclassified

• Euzoius, deacon and supporter of Arius; later Homoian bishop of Antioch (361-378, at the same time as three others).^[188][189]
• Dorotheus or Theodorus, Homoiousian and later Homoian bishop of Heraclea (?-378) and Antioch, (378-381, at the same time as three others).^[190][191]
• Uranius, bishop of Tyre.^[192]
• Onesimus, bishop of Nicomedia (359-?).^[193]
• Athanasius, bishop of Ancyra (359-?, at the same time as Basil of Ancyra).^[194]
• Acacius, bishop of Tarsus (359-?, at the same time as Silvanus of Tarsus).^[195]

• Silvanus, bishop of Tarsus.^[196]
• Hypatius of Cyrus, bishop of Nicaea (?-380).^[197]
• Leontius, bishop of Tripolis.^[198][199]
• Theodosius, a bishop of Philadelphia in Lydia.^[200][201]
• John, Anomean bishop of Palestine (c. 379-?).^[202]
• Evagrius, bishop of Mytelene.^[203]
• Asterius, presbyter in Antioch, possibly the same as an Asterius who supported Acacius at Seleucia.^[204][205]

[edit] See also

• Arianism
• Arius
• Athanasius
• Christian views of Jesus
• Constantinian shift
• History of Christianity
• Nontrinitarianism
• Semi-Arianism
• Shituf
• Trinitarianism

[edit] References

[edit] External links

• Timeline of the Arian controversy
• Documents of the early Arian controversy