Arius of Alexandria a heretic or a Martyr
Arius, who was born in Egypt in 256 A.D., was a parish priest in Alexandria. He had studied under St. Lucian of Antioch, the founder of the school of Antioch, who had earlier been condemned for holding that Christ was only a man; although he was later reconciled. He is called the "Father of Arianism" because "Arius and almost all the 4th-century Arian theologians were his students. Calling themselves Lucianists and Collucianists, they developed his adoptionist and subordinationist tendencies into a full heresy."
[Harkins 1967, 1057, 1058]
With this background Arius struggled with the question of the Trinity. His teaching in Alexandria was the following: "Personal distinctions were not eternally present within the nature of God. . . the Godhead Himself was responsible for them. . . Identifying the eternal Godhead with the Father and regarding the Logos ('Logos' is simply a Greek word for 'word') as no more than a power or quality of the Father, he said that before time began the Father had created the Son by the power of the Word to be His agent in creation.
The Son was not therefore to be identified with the Godhead, He was only God in a derivative sense, and since there was once when he did not exist He could not be eternal. Arius stressed the subordination of the Logos to such an extent as to affirm His creaturehood, to deny His eternity and to assert His capacity for change and suffering." [Ward 1955, 41]
The Arians believed that Jesus Christ was the Logos (the Word). and he was created. They believed he had a begining in time, and therefore did not "share the same essence with the father" but had an entirely different essence. so they did not believe that Jesus Christ is co-eternal with the father or sharing in his divinity.
"... it seems, in fact, that Proverbs 8:22-31 was the starting point of Arianism - interpreted as it was, by the Arians in the light of certain philosophical assumptions: 'God,' they said, 'was absolutely one, the only unbegotten, the only eternal, the only one without any begining, the only true, the only one who had immortality, the only wise, the only good, the only potentate... the monad and the princple of creation of all things.' (Arius Epistile to Alexander, 2 4 (Opitz 3:12-13). Nor did he share these prerogatives with anyone, not even with the Word.
Arius' view was based on agennesia i.e. that God is unbegotten, hence God is unique and eternal. Consequently, Christ who was begotten (and referred to himself constantly as 'son of man') couldn't be the true God.
Arius had picked up on the idea that Christ was not the literal Son of God, but was the Jewish Messiah, an idea that his teacher Lucian would have found favour with. He would have found ample evidence of this from the Gospels themselves:
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God. (Matthew 5:9)
Arius wrote:
Indeed we can become sons of God, like Christ.
◕ Arius Versus The Alexandrian Bishop
Arius' views began to spread among the people and the Alexandrian clergy. Alexander the Bishop called a meeting of his priests and deacons. The Bishop insisted on the unity of the Godhead. Arius continued to argue that since the Son was begotten of the Father then at some point He began to exist. Therefore there was a time when the Son did not exist. Arius refused to submit to the Bishop and continued to spread his teaching.
◕ Constantine Learns of Conflict
Eventually, news got back to the Emperor Constantine about this conflict between Bishop Alexander and Arius. Constantine was concerned about the de-stabilising effects that such a feud might have.
He asked his cleric Bishop Hosius of Cordova to write to both Alexander and Arius in the following terms:
Constantine the Victor, Supreme Augustus, to Alexander and Arius .... "how deep a wound has not only my ears but my heart received from the report that divisions exist among yourselves. I find their cause to be of a truly insignificant nature, quite unworthy of such bitter contention."
Yet, it soon became clear that simple politics would not resolve such a situation. Alexander was adamant that Arius was a trouble-maker, and that he could not reconcile with him, as he wrote:
For it befits us as Christians to keep aloof from those who think or speak against Christ. (Athanas. Hist. Eccl. i.6)
On the recommendation of Bishop Hosius, Constantine called a world Church council or synod, and the venue was changed to Nicaea. The Council of Nicaea would therefore address the issue of the nature of Jesus Christ and would have lasting effects on the Church from them on.
◕ Council of Nicaea
There had been twenty Arian sympathisers among the attendees to the synod, who are thought to have numbered more than three hundred. Indeed, it is suggested that Constantine changed the venue of the Council from Ancyra to Nicaea to make it easier for the Western bishops to attend, and hence turn the balance against the Eastern Church which still sympathised with its Jewish origins.
The Council strongly rejected the statement of Arius that 'There was when he was not', although two Bishops from Libya refused to go along with this.
The Council finally accepted the following Creed which became known as the Nicene Creed:
"One Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father as only-begotten, that is from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light."
Arius refused to sign acceptance of the Nicene Creed which stated that Christ was of the same divine nature as God. He would suffer the consequences, as Constantine was keen to end the conflict as soon as possible, and would no longer tolerate any further debate on the issue.
Many commentators have noted Constantine's political ambitions, and the fact that he wanted a united Church in order to maintain a stable power base around the mediterranean. He therefore had to take strong action against Arius, and he needed to be 'seen to be taking such action' in order to gain support from the clergy throughout the known world.
◕ Arius in Exile
Following Nicaea, Arius was banished to Illyricum. Meanwhile, in an effort to stamp out the Arian view through brute force, the Emperor Constantine wrote:
"If any treatise composed by Arius is discovered, let it be consigned to the flames ... in order that no memorial of him whatever be left ... [and] if anyone shall be caught concealing a book by Arius, and does not instantly bring it out and burn it, the penalty shall be death."
Such sentiments from the Church leader made it very difficult for Arius to propagate his views. Arius was undeterred. He maintained his views, and said of his maltreatment:
"We are persecuted because we say that the son had a beginning, but God is without beginning ... and this we say because he is neither part of God nor derived from any substance."
soon later Arius died while out walking in the streets of Constantinople in unclear circumstances.
Arius, who was born in Egypt in 256 A.D., was a parish priest in Alexandria. He had studied under St. Lucian of Antioch, the founder of the school of Antioch, who had earlier been condemned for holding that Christ was only a man; although he was later reconciled. He is called the "Father of Arianism" because "Arius and almost all the 4th-century Arian theologians were his students. Calling themselves Lucianists and Collucianists, they developed his adoptionist and subordinationist tendencies into a full heresy."
[Harkins 1967, 1057, 1058]
With this background Arius struggled with the question of the Trinity. His teaching in Alexandria was the following: "Personal distinctions were not eternally present within the nature of God. . . the Godhead Himself was responsible for them. . . Identifying the eternal Godhead with the Father and regarding the Logos ('Logos' is simply a Greek word for 'word') as no more than a power or quality of the Father, he said that before time began the Father had created the Son by the power of the Word to be His agent in creation.
The Son was not therefore to be identified with the Godhead, He was only God in a derivative sense, and since there was once when he did not exist He could not be eternal. Arius stressed the subordination of the Logos to such an extent as to affirm His creaturehood, to deny His eternity and to assert His capacity for change and suffering." [Ward 1955, 41]
The Arians believed that Jesus Christ was the Logos (the Word). and he was created. They believed he had a begining in time, and therefore did not "share the same essence with the father" but had an entirely different essence. so they did not believe that Jesus Christ is co-eternal with the father or sharing in his divinity.
"... it seems, in fact, that Proverbs 8:22-31 was the starting point of Arianism - interpreted as it was, by the Arians in the light of certain philosophical assumptions: 'God,' they said, 'was absolutely one, the only unbegotten, the only eternal, the only one without any begining, the only true, the only one who had immortality, the only wise, the only good, the only potentate... the monad and the princple of creation of all things.' (Arius Epistile to Alexander, 2 4 (Opitz 3:12-13). Nor did he share these prerogatives with anyone, not even with the Word.
Arius' view was based on agennesia i.e. that God is unbegotten, hence God is unique and eternal. Consequently, Christ who was begotten (and referred to himself constantly as 'son of man') couldn't be the true God.
Arius had picked up on the idea that Christ was not the literal Son of God, but was the Jewish Messiah, an idea that his teacher Lucian would have found favour with. He would have found ample evidence of this from the Gospels themselves:
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God. (Matthew 5:9)
Arius wrote:
Indeed we can become sons of God, like Christ.
◕ Arius Versus The Alexandrian Bishop
Arius' views began to spread among the people and the Alexandrian clergy. Alexander the Bishop called a meeting of his priests and deacons. The Bishop insisted on the unity of the Godhead. Arius continued to argue that since the Son was begotten of the Father then at some point He began to exist. Therefore there was a time when the Son did not exist. Arius refused to submit to the Bishop and continued to spread his teaching.
◕ Constantine Learns of Conflict
Eventually, news got back to the Emperor Constantine about this conflict between Bishop Alexander and Arius. Constantine was concerned about the de-stabilising effects that such a feud might have.
He asked his cleric Bishop Hosius of Cordova to write to both Alexander and Arius in the following terms:
Constantine the Victor, Supreme Augustus, to Alexander and Arius .... "how deep a wound has not only my ears but my heart received from the report that divisions exist among yourselves. I find their cause to be of a truly insignificant nature, quite unworthy of such bitter contention."
Yet, it soon became clear that simple politics would not resolve such a situation. Alexander was adamant that Arius was a trouble-maker, and that he could not reconcile with him, as he wrote:
For it befits us as Christians to keep aloof from those who think or speak against Christ. (Athanas. Hist. Eccl. i.6)
On the recommendation of Bishop Hosius, Constantine called a world Church council or synod, and the venue was changed to Nicaea. The Council of Nicaea would therefore address the issue of the nature of Jesus Christ and would have lasting effects on the Church from them on.
◕ Council of Nicaea
There had been twenty Arian sympathisers among the attendees to the synod, who are thought to have numbered more than three hundred. Indeed, it is suggested that Constantine changed the venue of the Council from Ancyra to Nicaea to make it easier for the Western bishops to attend, and hence turn the balance against the Eastern Church which still sympathised with its Jewish origins.
The Council strongly rejected the statement of Arius that 'There was when he was not', although two Bishops from Libya refused to go along with this.
The Council finally accepted the following Creed which became known as the Nicene Creed:
"One Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father as only-begotten, that is from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light."
Arius refused to sign acceptance of the Nicene Creed which stated that Christ was of the same divine nature as God. He would suffer the consequences, as Constantine was keen to end the conflict as soon as possible, and would no longer tolerate any further debate on the issue.
Many commentators have noted Constantine's political ambitions, and the fact that he wanted a united Church in order to maintain a stable power base around the mediterranean. He therefore had to take strong action against Arius, and he needed to be 'seen to be taking such action' in order to gain support from the clergy throughout the known world.
◕ Arius in Exile
Following Nicaea, Arius was banished to Illyricum. Meanwhile, in an effort to stamp out the Arian view through brute force, the Emperor Constantine wrote:
"If any treatise composed by Arius is discovered, let it be consigned to the flames ... in order that no memorial of him whatever be left ... [and] if anyone shall be caught concealing a book by Arius, and does not instantly bring it out and burn it, the penalty shall be death."
Such sentiments from the Church leader made it very difficult for Arius to propagate his views. Arius was undeterred. He maintained his views, and said of his maltreatment:
"We are persecuted because we say that the son had a beginning, but God is without beginning ... and this we say because he is neither part of God nor derived from any substance."
soon later Arius died while out walking in the streets of Constantinople in unclear circumstances.
![Photo: Arius of Alexandria a heretic or a Martyr
Arius, who was born in Egypt in 256 A.D., was a parish priest in Alexandria. He had studied under St. Lucian of Antioch, the founder of the school of Antioch, who had earlier been condemned for holding that Christ was only a man; although he was later reconciled. He is called the "Father of Arianism" because "Arius and almost all the 4th-century Arian theologians were his students. Calling themselves Lucianists and Collucianists, they developed his adoptionist and subordinationist tendencies into a full heresy."
[Harkins 1967, 1057, 1058]
With this background Arius struggled with the question of the Trinity. His teaching in Alexandria was the following: "Personal distinctions were not eternally present within the nature of God. . . the Godhead Himself was responsible for them. . . Identifying the eternal Godhead with the Father and regarding the Logos ('Logos' is simply a Greek word for 'word') as no more than a power or quality of the Father, he said that before time began the Father had created the Son by the power of the Word to be His agent in creation.
The Son was not therefore to be identified with the Godhead, He was only God in a derivative sense, and since there was once when he did not exist He could not be eternal. Arius stressed the subordination of the Logos to such an extent as to affirm His creaturehood, to deny His eternity and to assert His capacity for change and suffering." [Ward 1955, 41]
The Arians believed that Jesus Christ was the Logos (the Word). and he was created. They believed he had a begining in time, and therefore did not "share the same essence with the father" but had an entirely different essence. so they did not believe that Jesus Christ is co-eternal with the father or sharing in his divinity.
"... it seems, in fact, that Proverbs 8:22-31 was the starting point of Arianism - interpreted as it was, by the Arians in the light of certain philosophical assumptions: 'God,' they said, 'was absolutely one, the only unbegotten, the only eternal, the only one without any begining, the only true, the only one who had immortality, the only wise, the only good, the only potentate... the monad and the princple of creation of all things.' (Arius Epistile to Alexander, 2 4 (Opitz 3:12-13). Nor did he share these prerogatives with anyone, not even with the Word.
Arius' view was based on agennesia i.e. that God is unbegotten, hence God is unique and eternal. Consequently, Christ who was begotten (and referred to himself constantly as 'son of man') couldn't be the true God.
Arius had picked up on the idea that Christ was not the literal Son of God, but was the Jewish Messiah, an idea that his teacher Lucian would have found favour with. He would have found ample evidence of this from the Gospels themselves:
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God. (Matthew 5:9)
Arius wrote:
Indeed we can become sons of God, like Christ.
◕ Arius Versus The Alexandrian Bishop
Arius' views began to spread among the people and the Alexandrian clergy. Alexander the Bishop called a meeting of his priests and deacons. The Bishop insisted on the unity of the Godhead. Arius continued to argue that since the Son was begotten of the Father then at some point He began to exist. Therefore there was a time when the Son did not exist. Arius refused to submit to the Bishop and continued to spread his teaching.
◕ Constantine Learns of Conflict
Eventually, news got back to the Emperor Constantine about this conflict between Bishop Alexander and Arius. Constantine was concerned about the de-stabilising effects that such a feud might have.
He asked his cleric Bishop Hosius of Cordova to write to both Alexander and Arius in the following terms:
Constantine the Victor, Supreme Augustus, to Alexander and Arius .... "how deep a wound has not only my ears but my heart received from the report that divisions exist among yourselves. I find their cause to be of a truly insignificant nature, quite unworthy of such bitter contention."
Yet, it soon became clear that simple politics would not resolve such a situation. Alexander was adamant that Arius was a trouble-maker, and that he could not reconcile with him, as he wrote:
For it befits us as Christians to keep aloof from those who think or speak against Christ. (Athanas. Hist. Eccl. i.6)
On the recommendation of Bishop Hosius, Constantine called a world Church council or synod, and the venue was changed to Nicaea. The Council of Nicaea would therefore address the issue of the nature of Jesus Christ and would have lasting effects on the Church from them on.
◕ Council of Nicaea
There had been twenty Arian sympathisers among the attendees to the synod, who are thought to have numbered more than three hundred. Indeed, it is suggested that Constantine changed the venue of the Council from Ancyra to Nicaea to make it easier for the Western bishops to attend, and hence turn the balance against the Eastern Church which still sympathised with its Jewish origins.
The Council strongly rejected the statement of Arius that 'There was when he was not', although two Bishops from Libya refused to go along with this.
The Council finally accepted the following Creed which became known as the Nicene Creed:
"One Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father as only-begotten, that is from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light."
Arius refused to sign acceptance of the Nicene Creed which stated that Christ was of the same divine nature as God. He would suffer the consequences, as Constantine was keen to end the conflict as soon as possible, and would no longer tolerate any further debate on the issue.
Many commentators have noted Constantine's political ambitions, and the fact that he wanted a united Church in order to maintain a stable power base around the mediterranean. He therefore had to take strong action against Arius, and he needed to be 'seen to be taking such action' in order to gain support from the clergy throughout the known world.
◕ Arius in Exile
Following Nicaea, Arius was banished to Illyricum. Meanwhile, in an effort to stamp out the Arian view through brute force, the Emperor Constantine wrote:
"If any treatise composed by Arius is discovered, let it be consigned to the flames ... in order that no memorial of him whatever be left ... [and] if anyone shall be caught concealing a book by Arius, and does not instantly bring it out and burn it, the penalty shall be death."
Such sentiments from the Church leader made it very difficult for Arius to propagate his views. Arius was undeterred. He maintained his views, and said of his maltreatment:
"We are persecuted because we say that the son had a beginning, but God is without beginning ... and this we say because he is neither part of God nor derived from any substance."
soon later Arius died while out walking in the streets of Constantinople in unclear circumstances.](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vtQo3XuX3LYihKZCrZGU92oxrcN8jBPhH8U8KdBNgHEWSvSW1of_SmDF2xiAMaBzOU8CfVYengUCk2G5GD6rtoxfeLFctL2vgLtFZfVXO3Vrb68jFYea_JIq0l4k42rN9ofHRC13VaWQM70exY9uTtt7RRa-hgwjeQttKm-9bR5iK9FAAQmWfVXtgNsyA=s0-d)
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق