Search Results

The ‘Arianism’ of the ‘Eusebians’

David M. Gwynn

in The Eusebians: The Polemic of Athanasius of Alexandria and the Construction of the `Arian Controversy'

This chapter assesses Athanasius’ presentation of the ‘Eusebians’ as ‘Arian’. After a brief introduction to Athanasius’ highly polarized heresiological polemic, it traces Athanasius’ construction of ... More

This chapter assesses Athanasius’ presentation of the ‘Eusebians’ as ‘Arian’. After a brief introduction to Athanasius’ highly polarized heresiological polemic, it traces Athanasius’ construction of the ‘Arianism’ which he imposes upon his opponents. A comparison between this ‘Athanasian Arianism’, the doctrines of Arius himself, and the known doctrines of Eusebius of Nicomedia and Asterius ‘the Sophist’ reveals that these two alleged ‘Eusebians’ differ theologically both from Arius’ and from Athanasius’ definition of ‘Arianism’. Indeed, Eusebius and Asterius appear to have been representative of a widespread theological position held by a significant number of eastern bishops in the first half of the 4th century, a theology expressed above all by the ‘Dedication Creed’ of the Council of Antioch in 341. The chapter then turns to the methodology through which Athanasius created his distorted polarized construct of the ‘Arian Controversy’, and concludes with a brief assessment of how this construct influences Athanasius’ interpretation of the Council of Nicaea and the Nicene Creed.Less

From Nicaea to the Death of Constantine

Sara Parvis

in Marcellus of Ancyra and the Lost Years of the Arian Controversy 325-345

This chapter argues that Eustathius of Antioch’s deposition took place in autumn 327 as a result of real or faked evidence of sexual misdemeanour, triggering a reversal by Constantine of his previous ... More

This chapter argues that Eustathius of Antioch’s deposition took place in autumn 327 as a result of real or faked evidence of sexual misdemeanour, triggering a reversal by Constantine of his previous ecclesiastical policy. It is suggested that Marcellus wrote his Against Asterius partly in response to this event and to the subsequent return of Eusebius of Nicomedia. It is argued that Marcellus, like Athanasius, was trapped by a summons to the Synod of Tyre in 335 when he refused to accept Arius’ reception back into communion at Jerusalem, despite Constantine’s orders. Marcellus’ trial is examined from the accounts of Sozomen and Eusebius of Caesarea, and his innocence established of the theological charges brought.Less

Trinitarian Debates from Nicaea (325) to Sirmium (351)

Carl L. Beckwith

in Hilary of Poitiers on the Trinity: From De Fide to De Trinitate

This chapter discusses the Trinitarian debates from the Council of Nicaea (325) to the synod of Sirmium (351) and the emergence of the creed from Nicaea in the West as a standard of orthodoxy.

Hilary's Understanding and Use of Scripture

Carl L. Beckwith

in Hilary of Poitiers on the Trinity: From De Fide to De Trinitate

Hilary's understanding of scripture and its normative use in discussions about God does not proceed on apologetic grounds. The challenge faced by Hilary is that his Homoian opponents routinely insist ... More

Hilary's understanding of scripture and its normative use in discussions about God does not proceed on apologetic grounds. The challenge faced by Hilary is that his Homoian opponents routinely insist that their theological assertions are rooted in scripture. Hilary regrettably acknowledges throughout De Trinitate that his opponents not only assign scripture a normative role in their arguments but also promote what he considers faulty theological positions by appealing to scripture only. Hilary recognizes that the dispute over scripture is not on its place in theological reflection but over its employment and the assumptions made about the text. This first half of this chapter surveys Hilary's understanding of scripture. The second half of the chapter looks at two key texts from the fourth-century Trinitarian debates: Proverbs 8 and the prologue to the Gospel of John. These texts demonstrate not only Hilary's theological and exegetical development in the various editorial stages of De Trinitate but also show his careful handling of scripture in securing a pro-Nicene theology.Less

Arianism Opposed:The Word's Divinity is Not Diminished by Involvement in Suffering

Paul L. Gavrilyuk

in The Suffering of the Impassible God: The Dialectics of Patristic Thought

Five major interpretations of Arianism are considered. According to the Hanson-Wiles interpretation, the Arians used psilanthropic argument to emphasize that God suffered in Christ. The author shows ... More

Five major interpretations of Arianism are considered. According to the Hanson-Wiles interpretation, the Arians used psilanthropic argument to emphasize that God suffered in Christ. The author shows that this interpretation is one sided, partly because other parties involved in the christological debates of the fourth and fifth centuries also used the psilanthropic argument. The Arians emphasized the impassibility of the High God in order to exclude him from any participation in human suffering. The pro-Nicene theologians succeeded in sustaining the vital tension between the transcendence of God and his involvement in suffering in the incarnation.Less

The Council at Serdica

Hamilton Hess

in The Early Development of Canon Law and the Council of Serdica

The failure of the attempted settlement of the dispute over the teachings of Arius by the Council of Nicaea in 325 resulted in intense turmoil within the Church during the decades to follow, and this ... More

The failure of the attempted settlement of the dispute over the teachings of Arius by the Council of Nicaea in 325 resulted in intense turmoil within the Church during the decades to follow, and this was greatly exacerbated by the division of the Empire after the death of Constantine and the differing ecclesiastical policies of his heirs. Following the deposition of Athanasius and other bishops by the partisans of Arius and their restoration by a council at Rome in 341, a council to resolve the doctrinal differences and personal grievances was convened by permission of the emperors to meet at Serdica in 343. Upon arrival at Serdica, the Eastern bishops, largely sympathetic with the anti‐Nicene party, refused to meet with the Westerns, and two rival councils were held. The Western council confirmed the restoration of Athanasius and his companions at Rome in 341, considered but rejected a new creed, wrote an encyclical and other letters, resolved a dispute over the dating of Easter, and enacted the canons that we are here considering; the Eastern council reapproved the Fourth Creed of Antioch, drafted a paschal cycle, wrote an encyclical condemning Athanasius and his associates and all who had entered into communion with them. The chapter ends with a brief discussion of the life of Ossius of Cordova, who presided over the Western council and was also the leading figure in the framing of the Serdican canons.Less

Constantine: Lactantius, Eusebius of Caesarea, Arius, and the Council of Nicaea

Henry Chadwick

in The Church in Ancient Society: From Galilee to Gregory the Great

The new situation created by the rise to sole power of a Christian emperor was seen by many Christians as fulfilment of the prophecy that God's word would spread throughout the civilized world but ... More

The new situation created by the rise to sole power of a Christian emperor was seen by many Christians as fulfilment of the prophecy that God's word would spread throughout the civilized world but raised new questions about the unity of the Church. The Divine Institutes by Lactantius was directed against pagan philosophers and stressed the need for education about Christianity to put an end to persecution, while Eusebius of Caesarea wrote a panegyric of Constantine and about the superiority of biblical religion over paganism. However, the ‘subordinationist’ theology of Arius raised the fundamental problem of the Christian doctrine of God and was viewed by Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, as a heresy for which toleration was not possible. The Council of Nicaea in 325, the largest assembly of bishops yet gathered, produced the Nicene Creed, the effects of which divided the eastern Church. It would now be taken as axiomatic that dissenters were to be excluded from the Church, without any minority rights.Less

Patriarchs, Councils, and Controversies: 300–451

William, S.J. Harmless

in Desert Christians: An Introduction to the Literature of Early Monasticism

The patriarchs of Alexandria would cast long shadows over the history of Egyptian monasticism. This chapter focuses on the five most influential: Alexander, Athanasius, Theophilus, Cyril, and ... More

The patriarchs of Alexandria would cast long shadows over the history of Egyptian monasticism. This chapter focuses on the five most influential: Alexander, Athanasius, Theophilus, Cyril, and Dioscorus. It surveys both their careers and their theological controversies, especially their doctrine-defining clashes at the ecumenical Councils of Nicaea, Ephesus, and Chalcedon. This chapter provides critical historical and theological background, since the politics and theologies of the bishops of Alexandria figure prominently in early monastic literature, and their international prominence would help draw the world’s attention to Egypt and its monks.Less

Points of Departure

Lewis Ayres

in Nicaea and its Legacy: An Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology

Identifies a number of possible points of departure for considering the fourth century Trinitarian controversies and discusses three of them: the story of controversy in Alexandria between Arius and ... More

Identifies a number of possible points of departure for considering the fourth century Trinitarian controversies and discusses three of them: the story of controversy in Alexandria between Arius and Alexander; the legacy of Origen’s theology; and a common culture of scriptural interpretation that shaped the controversies.Less

Theological Trajectories In the Early Fourth Century: I

Lewis Ayres

in Nicaea and its Legacy: An Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology

Turns to the fourth and the most important point of departure: pre-existing tensions among theological trajectories present c.300. Looks first at Alexander and Athanasius’ theology and finds ... More

Turns to the fourth and the most important point of departure: pre-existing tensions among theological trajectories present c.300. Looks first at Alexander and Athanasius’ theology and finds parallels in Gregory Thaumaturgus, in some Antiochene theology and in some third century Alexandrian figures. Looks second at ‘Eubseian’ theology, a category that includes diverse figures such as Arius, Eusebius of Caesarea and Eusebius of Nicomedia and Asterius. Both trajectories considered here owe something to Origen. Also questions the usefulness of the term ‘subordinationism.’Less

Confusion and Controversy: AD 325–340

Lewis Ayres

in Nicaea and its Legacy: An Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology

Initially focuses on the council and creed of Nicaea. Sketches the course of the discussion at the council and asks if the creed was intended as a universal standard of faith. The middle sections of ... More

Initially focuses on the council and creed of Nicaea. Sketches the course of the discussion at the council and asks if the creed was intended as a universal standard of faith. The middle sections of the chapter focuses on Nicaea’s controversial terminology. The author then asks if we can identify a common theology among the architects of the creed. The last section of the chapter narrates the progress of controversy after Nicaea up to 342.Less

Begotten and Adopted Sons of God—Before and After Nicea

Michael Peppard

in The Son of God in the Roman World: Divine Sonship in its Social and Political Context

Chapter 5 synthesizes a broad range of texts in order to show the shifting relationship between begotten and adoptive metaphors during the first four centuries of Christianity. These texts show how ... More

Chapter 5 synthesizes a broad range of texts in order to show the shifting relationship between begotten and adoptive metaphors during the first four centuries of Christianity. These texts show how the resonance of “son of God” changed over time. Many authors of the first and second centuries, when describing the divine sonship of Christ and Christians, mixed the begotten and adoptive metaphors. But by the fourth century, adoption was no longer a crucial, visible component of imperial ideology and thus lost some (but not all) of its appeal as a metaphor of power and exaltation. The chapter offers a view of several interweaving themes on the road to Nicea: begotten and adoptive metaphors of divine sonship; the sonship of Christ and the sonship of Christians; Christ as unique and Christ as exemplar; philosophy and narrative; theological doctrine and liturgical practice.Less

Odium Theologicum: The Liberal as Antichrist

Robert Pattison

in The Great Dissent: John Henry Newman and the Liberal Heresy

This chapter tells the story of why Newman came to hate Renn Dickson Hampden, a living oracle of liberalism. Newman's violent reaction to liberals like Hampden coincided with his researches into ... More

This chapter tells the story of why Newman came to hate Renn Dickson Hampden, a living oracle of liberalism. Newman's violent reaction to liberals like Hampden coincided with his researches into 4th-century heresy. In the pages of the neglected Fathers of the Church, he discovered that the intellectual depravity he saw around him had a pedigree extending further back than Locke and the empiricists, further back than Luther and Calvin, further back even than Wycliffe and the Lollards. It was Arius, the 4th-century heresiarch, who had first defiled Christian civilization with liberal apostasy.Less

Heresy and Liberalism: Cicero, Arius, and Socinus

Robert Pattison

in The Great Dissent: John Henry Newman and the Liberal Heresy

This chapter explains how Newman reached the conclusion that Arius, the 4th-century heresiarch, defiled Christian civilization with liberal apostasy. Other heretics than Arius and Hampden might have ... More

This chapter explains how Newman reached the conclusion that Arius, the 4th-century heresiarch, defiled Christian civilization with liberal apostasy. Other heretics than Arius and Hampden might have been selected to illustrate the anti-dogmatic principle against which Newman rebelled. Among his contemporaries, Blanco White and John Stuart Mill provoked his indignation as much as Hampden did, and the ancient errors of Nestorius and Sabellius, were, he thought, tainted with the same protoliberalism that infected the theology of Arius. But Arius and Hampden are at least representative of the humanistic tradition against which Newman hardened his heart, and in addition, each can claim to be important in his own right. Arius has been controversial for 1,600 years, and if Newman was right, he is one of the pivotal figures of Western thought.Less

Epilogue

Susan Wessel

in Cyril of Alexandria and the Nestorian Controversy: The Making of a Saint and of a Heretic

After Chalcedon, Cyril's Twelve Chapters, which he had composed in opposition to Nestorius and which the Antiochenes had said were heretical, were finally reaffirmed at the Fifth Ecumenical Council ... More

After Chalcedon, Cyril's Twelve Chapters, which he had composed in opposition to Nestorius and which the Antiochenes had said were heretical, were finally reaffirmed at the Fifth Ecumenical Council that the emperor Justinian convened in 533. By the seventh century, Cyril was considered to be one of the greatest church fathers of Eastern Christianity, while Nestorius emerged as second only to Arius, the quintessential heretic of the Eastern church. Cyril's complete rhetorical victory implies that his success was not simply a political accomplishment based on the alliances he fashioned. Instead, it was his strategy in identifying himself with the orthodoxy of Athanasius in his victory over Arianism, and in skillfully using the tropes and figures of the second sophistic that elevated Cyril to orthodox status.Less

Before Nicaea

Peter Widdicombe

in The Fatherhood of God from Origen to Athanasius

This chapter discusses the theological struggle of the early 4th century, a struggle centred on the tension between the affirmation of the divine attribute of ingenerateness and that of the eternal ... More

This chapter discusses the theological struggle of the early 4th century, a struggle centred on the tension between the affirmation of the divine attribute of ingenerateness and that of the eternal generation of the Son. The focus of the early Arian debate was on the status of the Son and the nature of his relation to the Father. It was not directly concerned with the fatherhood of God, although Alexander, and also Athanasius early on had a sense that the debate impinged on the nature of divine fatherhood. Arius does not discuss the idea of God's fatherhood, but his resolution of the tension between the two postulates of the divine ingenerateness and the eternity of the Son by the denial of the eternal generation of the Son meant that fatherhood could not be perceived as an essential attribute of God's nature. For Arius, the names Father and Son did not imply a natural continuity between the two, but rather a relational continuity created by a free act of God's will.Less

Aristotle’s Case Against the Sufficiency Thesis

Daniel C. Russell

in Happiness for Humans

This chapter begins the examination of the ancient debate over the sufficiency of virtuous activity for happiness, starting with Aristotle and his ancient successors. Although Aristotle is often ... More

This chapter begins the examination of the ancient debate over the sufficiency of virtuous activity for happiness, starting with Aristotle and his ancient successors. Although Aristotle is often thought today to have shown definitively that virtuous activity is not sufficient for happiness, this chapter argues that Aristotle’s view was in fact an underdog in the ancient debate. In order to succeed, Aristotle’s position requires the embodied conception of activity outlined in Chapter 4.Less