Ariansim and the Council of Nicea

In today’s pragmatic world, few Christians realize the heresies that dominate their culture. Fewer still realize the treacherous implications that heretical beliefs can bring upon a society. And yet, these false philosophies have raged since the beginning of the world, threatening to uproot societies and ruin empires. Early Byzantium was no exception. The Byzantine Empire had scarcely won its place amongst the great nations of the world when the heresy of Arianism reared its ugly head. Only Providence knew how the tenants of this heresy, the dangerous consequences that forced their way into Byzantium society, and the Council of Nicea that arose to address this issue would play a vital role in the chronicle of the kingdom of God.

The tenants of Arianism were simple in nature, and yet contained grave error. Although Arius (1), presbyter of Alexandria at the time, brought his beliefs into public play, we can trace the roots of Arianism from theologians Origin and Dionysius. Basically, Arius taught that although God was without beginning, Christ was created by God from nothing at a definite period in time, was therefore not coeternal with the Father, and was mutable and inferior to Him. He also believed that Christ was made God by the Father and was therefore to be worshipped. As time went on, the Arians disagreed among themselves on Christ’s relationship to the Father; some of the radicals claimed that Christ was completely unlike the Father and therefore fallible.

One of the dangerous consequences Arianism thrust upon Byzantine society is that it threatened to lead to a Statist and Unitarian mentality. For this to be understood one must recognize the raging conflict over the doctrine of the Trinity. With the resulting beliefs arising from such a conflict come many consequences (2) that have a profound effect on the world we live in. Throughout history, true Christianity has been the only religion to adequately explain the doctrine of the Trinity, the one and the many. As the City of Man attempts to explain how one, that is society as a whole, and the many, that is the individuals of that society, relate to each other they fall into error. Focusing overly on the individual, the heresy of the many, or on the state as a union, the heresy of the one, the balance is thrown off and tyranny or anarchy reigns. This explains the common error of humanity to fall into polytheism or Unitarianism. Without the Spirit mankind cannot explain the mystery of the Trinity.

Arianism as well falls into this trap of the heresy of the one. If we follow Arianism to its logical conclusion: if Christ was human and became God, man can also become God and should therefore be worshipped. (Rushdoony) This is the most basic principle of Statism: man is God. Through the years, this doctrine would seep into Byzantium as emperors would cross the line from being God’s servant, to imagining themselves as being God himself; a fatal error indeed.

Constantine, emperor of Byzantium (3), found yet another danger to this heresy. To him, having the Christian Church unified under his command was crucial to Byzantium’s survival. If the Arian Heresy divided the church, the country of Byzantium would be at risk. At the opening of the council of Nicea Constantine explained, “For my own part, I hold any sedition within the church of God as formidable as any war or battle, and more difficult still to bring to an end. I am consequently more opposed to it than anything else. (Norwhich)”

Constantine tried to stop the brewing contention between Arianism and Orthodox Christianity by sending a letter to Arius and his opponent, Alexander. This letter tried to convince the two that this argument was trifling and forgiveness was the best option. It didn’t work. Constantine then began what was to be the first ecumenical council of the Church: the Council of Nicea.

The council was to be held at the imperial palace in Nicea, modern Asia Minor, from May 20 to June 19, 325 A.D. Constantine’s intention was for the gathering to be a nationwide ordeal, but it was not to be. The western church, uninterested in the east’s quibbles, only sent a few delegates. From the east came nearly three hundred. Phillip Schaff sums up the importance of this event. “The Council of Nicea is the most important event of the fourth century, and its bloodless intellectual victory over a dangerous error is of far greater consequence to the progress of true civilization, than all the bloody victories of Constantine and his successors. (Hodge).”

The council desired to express their conclusion in a creed. The Arian’s apologetic being unfavorable, Eusebius of Caesarea, of a more neutral state, proposed an acceptable creed. For use in the creed, the Greek word Homoousios, meaning of the same substance, was inscribed to Christ.

“We believe in one God, the Father almighty, the maker of things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, only begotten, begotten of the Father, that is of the essence of the Father, by whom all things were made whether in heaven or on earth…But those who say, that there was a time when He (the Son) was not, that He was not before He was made, or was made out of nothing, or of another or different essence or substance, that He was a creature, or mutable, or susceptible of change, the Holy Catholic Church anathematizes. (Hodge)” This being put forth, Arius was temporarily exiled and his writings burnt.

The Council of Nicea was effective in maintaining the unity of the church in Byzantine and we see that this practice has biblical precedent. In Acts fifteen we find Paul and Barnabas disputing over the matter of circumcision. Their first response was to hold a council, or presbytery, at Jerusalem. After coming to agreement on the issue they wrote a letter, a creed, to those being questioned. This passage lays out not only the process of resolving disputes in the church but also the biblical principle of church accountability. Likewise, the Council of Nicea was a foundation stone to the church and would settle the vital doctrine of the divinity of Christ. Furthermore, its example would allow many essential doctrines to be confirmed over the early ages of Christendom which if compromised would have caused damage to the church of Christ. However, with such a foundation covering centuries of church history, why has the modern American church forgotten this principle? Everywhere we find churches apostatizing on the major issues of the faith; issues such as the origin of the universe, the depravity of man, or the definition of biblical marriage. Yet few denominations have called even a small council to answer such basic questions. In the meantime the American church is sliding farther and farther from biblical Christianity. Who will be the next Constantine?

Epilogue

A Short Apologetic against Arianism

When any question arises concerning theology, metaphysics, or any area of life, the Christian’s first response should be to go to the pages of the bible. The bible, although it may not distinctly mention Arianism, distinctly opposes the idea. Romans 9:5, for example, “…Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever.” In John 10:30 Jesus claims, “I and my Father are one.”

In the fourth century, Arians used Proverbs 8:22 to defend their beliefs. “The Lord already possessed me long ago, when his way began, before any of His works.” They claimed possessed means created. Hence we find Strong’s Concordance describing qânâh, Greek for possessed, as “To erect, i.e. create; by extens. To procure.” (Strong) The Arianian error; therefore, is in the context of the passage. Nevertheless, nowhere in Proverbs 8 does it claim that this “wisdom” is the Eternal Son of God.

By using the text of Proverbs 8:22 to defend the reliability of their argument, the Arians inferred that they believed the Bible to be an honest source. But if part of the Bible is true, by its own standard, all must be true. And as mentioned above, John 10:30 clearly states that Christ is one with the Father. The Arians were being noticeably inconsistent. An inconsistent belief can not be trusted as fact or theory alike.

Endnotes

(1) To many, Arius’ untimely death proved the fact that he was heretical. Joseph Morecraft III describes Arius’ death in his book, History of Reformation in the West. “When he (Arius) was to return to Alexandria, Egypt, a leading preacher there, named Alexander, fell to the ground with his eyes filled with tears and prayed: “If Arius comes tomorrow to the church, take me away, and let me not perish with the guilty. But if you pity Your church, and You do pity it, take Arius away, lest when he enters heresy enter with him. (Rushdoony)” The next morning, as Arius and his retinue were making their way to the church as a triumphant procession, to be publicly reconciled with the church there so as to preach in it, “Arius stopped and left the procession suddenly because of gastric pain. After waiting some time, his followers investigated and found that the old man Arius had collapsed in (his own) blood and fallen headlong into the open latrine (Urinal).” After this he was often compared to Judas Iscariot, who died a similar death. This event proved vital to the conclusion of the Arian conflict in Byzantium.

(2) This is summed up in the cliché, “Ideas have consequences.”

(3) According to Joseph Morecraft, Constantine had two major weaknesses and one great strength. He was weak in that he was dualistic, wanting paganism to coexist with Christianity. Sadly, he also started popery and encouraged what would later become the Roman Catholic Church. Nevertheless, Constantine began the ecumenical councils of the church; a practice we find right from the pages of Scriptures. (Morecraft) He also ended the persecution of the church under Rome. Constantine’s faith has been doubted. According to legend he did have a faith experience, or vision, near the Battle of Milvian Bridge. Whether this experience played out in his life can be doubted. However, despite his errors, God did use this man to establish His church.

Bibliography

Hodge, Charles D.D, Systematic Theology, WORDsearch corp. 2009

LaTourette, Kenneth Scott, a History of Christianity volume I

Morecraft, Joseph, History of Christianity and Western Civilization, Vision Forum, San Antonio

Morecraft, Joseph, The History of the Reformation in the West

Norwich, John Julius, Byzantium, the Early Centuries, Alfred A. Knoph, publisher, 1988

Rushdoony, R.J., A Christian Survey of World History, “The Early Church and Byzantium,” Chaldedon /Ross House Books, Vallecito