Back to Topics

Briefly describe Arianism, and explain how its teaching was countered at  the Council of Nicaea (325 AD) and the Council of Constantinople ( 381 AD).

Arianism was a heresy which infiltrated the Church in the fourth century that denied the full divinity of Jesus Christ. It was named after its author, Arius. A native of Libya, Arius studied at the theological school of Lucian of Antioch, where other supporters of the Arian heresy were also trained. Arius was ordained a priest in Alexandria and became involved with a difference of opinion concerning the divinity of Jesus with his bishop. In 325, he was banished to Illyria because he would not move from what he believed. This doctrine was outlawed in 379 in the Roman Empire by Emperor Theodoseis I. This heresy is still around today in the form of Jehovah's Witnesses.

Arianism is built on the theory of the absolute uniqueness and transcendence of God. This means that God is the One and only God, and the only uncreated being in existence in the universe. He alone is able to own the characteristics deity. The characteristics cannot be allowed to be given to another being. All that exists has come from God the Father, all created matter and other beings.

Arius said that God the Father did not create the Earth directly but He used the Word which was created by Him to be the agent of creation. He stated that the Word is created, but is second only to God the Father. The Word of God is a creature created by the Father, and is not self existent.

He believed that the Word was at some point created, and the slogan of Arainism became "There was a time when He was not", although the Word was created before the creation of time itself! The Arians had a monotheistic view and could not accept the idea of two self existent beings.

Arianism puts forth the idea that God is unknowable by any created being, even though the Son has vast superiority to any created being, He cannot know God the Father. "The one who has a beginning is in no position to comprehend or lay hold of the one who has no beginning." ( McGrath, 1994:284.). As other creatures depend upon the grace of God to do anything, so does the Son. He is God's Word and even the Wisdom of God, but does not have the essence of God. He carries these titles only because He  co-operates with the Father. "Totally different in essence from the Father, the Son is able to change and even sin. When pressed as to how they could then refer to the Word as God or the Son of God, the Arians indicated that these designations were merely a matter of courtesy." ( Erickson, 1994:696).

"Arius's position can be summed up in the following manner.

1. The Son is a creature, who like other creatures, derives from the will of God.                         

2. The term 'Son' is thus a metaphor, an honorific term intended to underscore the rank of the Son among other creatures. It does not imply that Father and Son share the same being or status.

3. The status of the Son is itself a consequence not of the nature of the Son, but of the will of the Father." (McGrath, 1994:284).

This theology greatly troubled the early Church, and in 325, the Emperor Constantine called a ecumenical council in order to rectify the problem. Of the one thousand eight hundred bishops in the Roman Empire, three hundred and eighteen attended. On the agenda was the Arian dispute.

A man by the name Athanasius was vehemently opposed the theology of Arius. The culmination was at the Council of Nicea. He put to Arius that if the Son was a creature, He was like any other.

The idea of the creature hood of the Son had two specific repercussions. Both these would be damaging to the Arian way of thought. The argument that Athanasius used went along the line of the fact that only God can redeem man from the consequence of sin. Being a creature brings with it the need of redemption. No created creature can redeem another created creature, only the One that created can save the created creature.

Athanasius reminded the Arians that the  scriptures regard Jesus Christ as the  Saviour of the world. (John 4:42).and also that God alone is the only one that can redeem.

"The only possible solution, Athanasius argues, is to accept that Jesus is God incarnate. The logic of his argument at times goes like this:

1. No creature can redeem another creature.

2. According to Arius, Jesus Christ is a creature.

3. Therefore, according to Arius, Jesus Christ cannot redeem humanity.

At times, a slightly different style of argument can be discerned, resting upon the statements of Scripture and the Christian liturgical tradition.

1. Only God can save.

2. Jesus Christ saves.

3. Therefore Jesus Christ is God. " (McGrath, 1994:286)

Another argument put forth at the Council was the issue of idolatry. Athanaius made the point that Christians worship and pray to Jesus Christ. This was standard practice in the forth century. (Mcgrath, 1994).The argument went that if Jesus was in fact a creature, then Christians were then worshipping the created rather then the creator. They had in fact become guilty of idol worship.

Athanasius made it clear the Christians were forbidden to worship anyone or thing besides God alone. He stated that "Christians were right to worship and adore Jesus Christ, because by doing so, they were recognising Him for what He was - God incarnate." (McGrath, 1994:286).

The council put forth its own creed to exclude the Arian error, which is known as the Creed of Nicaea to set it apart from the Nicene Creed. It ruled out the Arian doctrine, but because of the use of a certain word, 'consubstantial', this implied to some that the Father and the Son were equally divine, but two separate beings. This worried some bishops. Others could see that the Father and Son were one in a single Godhead. The word 'consubstantial' was used in the Greek to describe two coins made of the same material. It is believed that Constantine had quite a bit of weight behind its use in the creed.

During the period between Emperors Constantine and Theodosius I were unsympathetic toward the creed and were friendly toward Arianism. Thus, the heresy crept back into the scene.

Theodosius I was a Christian Emperor and in 381 summoned the Council of Constantinople. The Creed of Nicaea was modified and became known as the Nicene Creed. The council marked the end of Arianism within the Empire, and emphatically asserted the deity of the Holy Spirit.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

*           Erickson, M. J., Christian Theology., (Baker Book House Company, 1983, 1984, 1985.)

*           McGrath, A. E., Christian Theology., (Blackwell Publishers, 1994.)

*           Renwick, A. M., The Story of the Church., (Inter-Varsity Press, 1977.)

*           Lion Handbook., The History of Christianity.,(Lion Publishing, 1977.)

*           "Arianism"., Christian History, pt.A., (Tabor College, 1989.)

*           "Council of Nicea".,Christian History, Pt.A., (Tabor College, 1989.)

*           "Arianism," ," Microsoft (R) Encarta. Copyright (c) 1994 Microsoft Corporation. Copyright (c) 1994 Funk & Wagnals Corporation.

*           "Nicaea, Councils of," Microsoft (R) Encarta. Copyright (c) 1994 Microsoft Corporation. Copyright (c) 1994 Funk & Wagnals Corporation.

*           "Constantinople, Councils of," Microsoft (R) Encarta. Copyright (c) 1994 Microsoft Corporation. Copyright (c) 1994 Funk & Wagnals Corporation.