Arius (; ; 250 or 256 – 336) was a Cyrenaic presbyter and ascetic. He was not the founder of Arianism.“Arius … represents a school … and the school was to some extent independent of him. Arianism did not look back on him later with respect and awe as its founder” (Hanson, R.P.C., The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God – The Arian Controversy 318-381 (1987), p. 97).“Arius’ role in ‘Arianism’ was not that of the founder of a sect. It was not his individual teaching that dominated the mid-century eastern Church” (Williams, Rowan, Arius, Heresy & Tradition, (2002/1987), p. 165).“Arius was part of a wider theological trajectory … he neither originated the trajectory nor uniquely exemplified it” (Ayres, Lewis, Nicaea and its legacy, An Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology (2004), p. 2). The opposing sides in the controversy between Arianism and Trinitarianism were already well established before the dispute between Arius and Alexander.“The conflict in the fourth century was one between two theological traditions, both of which were well established by the beginning of the century” (Lienhard). Arius's dispute with his bishop initiated the controversy, but the conflict between the two sides were inevitable.“The views of Arius were such as … to bring into unavoidable prominence a doctrinal crisis which had gradually been gathering. … He was the spark that started the explosion. But in himself he was of no great significance” (Hanson, R.P.C., The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God – The Arian Controversy 318-381 (1987), p. xvii).
Arianism holds that Jesus Christ was not coeternal with God the Father, but was rather created directly by God the Father before anything else as the true Firstborn. Arian theology and its doctrine regarding the nature of the Godhead showed a belief in radical subordinationism, a view notably disputed by 4th century figures such as Athanasius of Alexandria.
Constantine the Great's formal decriminalization of Christianity in the Roman Empire entailed the convention of ecumenical councils to remove theological divisions between opposing sects within the Church. Arius's theology was a prominent topic at the First Council of Nicaea, where Arianism was condemned in favor of Homoousian conceptions of God and Jesus. Opposition to Arianism remains embodied in the Nicene Creed, described as "a deliberately anti-Arian document". Nevertheless, despite concerted opposition, Arian churches persisted for centuries throughout Europe (especially in various Germanic kingdoms), the Middle East, and North Africa. They were suppressed by military conquest or by voluntary royal conversion between the fifth and seventh centuries.
Arius's role as the sole originator of Arian theology has been disputed by historians such as Rowan Williams, who stated that "Arius'[s] role in 'Arianism' was not that of the founder of a sect. It was not his individual teaching that dominated the mid-century eastern Church." Richard Hanson writes that Arius's specific espousal of subordinationist theology brought "into unavoidable prominence a doctrinal crisis which had gradually been gathering[...] He was the spark that started the explosion. But in himself he was of no great significance." The association between Arius and the theology titled after him has been argued to be a creation "based on the polemic of Nicene writers" such as Athanasius of Alexandria, a Homoousian.
Early life and personality
Reconstructing the life and doctrine of Arius has proven to be a difficult task.
Arius was of Berber descent. His father's name is given as Ammonius.
Hanson says that "Arius very probably had at some time studied with Lucian of Antioch" because he refers to somebody else as "truly a fellow-disciple of Lucian". But Williams questions whether "we should assume from the one word in Arius's letter that he had actually been Lucian's student".
In the past, many writers have assumed that this Arius is the same as the Arius who was involved in the Melitian schism, "who had an outward appearance of piety, and ... was eager to be a teacher". However, after several pages of detailed analysis, Williams concludes that "the Melitian Arius ... melt(s) away under close investigation".
In 313, Arius was made presbyter of the Baucalis district in Alexandria.
Arius's views have always been "represented as ... some hopelessly defective form of belief". Contrary to this view, Rowan Williams recently concluded that Arius is "a thinker and exegete of resourcefulness, sharpness and originality".
Although his character has been severely assailed by his opponents, Arius appears to have been a man of personal ascetic achievement, pure morals, and decided convictions."He was very tall in stature, with downcast countenance ... always garbed in a short cloak and sleeveless tunic; he spoke gently, and people found him persuasive and flattering."It is traditional to claim that Arius was a deliberate radical, breaking away from the 'orthodoxy' of the church fathers. However:"A great deal of recent work seeking to understand Arian spirituality has, not surprisingly, helped to demolish the notion of Arius and his supporters as deliberate radicals, attacking a time-honoured tradition."
"Arius was a committed theological conservative; more specifically, a conservative Alexandrian."
Arius's writings Very little of Arius's writing has survived. "As far as his own writings go, we have no more than three letters, (and) a few fragments of another." The three are:
The confession of faith Arius presented to Alexander of Alexandria, His letter to Eusebius of Nicomedia, and The confession he submitted to the emperor.
The letters' original text and English translation can be found in Fontes Nicaenae Synodi.S. Fernández (ed.), Fontes Nicaenae Synodi: the contemporary sources for the study of the Council of Nicaea (304-337), Brill 2024.
The Thalia is Arius's only known theological work but a complete and continuous text has not survived. Only extracts from it are found the writings of his enemies, "mostly from the pen of Athanasius of Alexandria, his bitterest and most prejudiced enemy".
Emperor Constantine ordered their burning while Arius was still living but R. P. C. Hanson concluded that so little survived because "the people of his day, whether they agreed with him or not, did not regard him (Arius) as a particularly significant writer."
Those works which have survived are quoted in the works of churchmen who denounced him as a heretic. This leads some—but not all—scholars to question their reliability. For example Hanson wrote:"Athanasius, a fierce opponent of Arius ... certainly would not have stopped short of misrepresenting what he said." "Athanasius... may be suspected of pressing the words maliciously rather further than Arius intended."Archbishop Rowan Williams agrees that Athanasius applied "unscrupulous tactics in polemic and struggle."
Arian controversy
Beginnings
The Diocletianic Persecution (Great Persecution) of AD 303–313 was Rome's final attempt to limit the expansion of Christianity across the empire. That persecution came to an end when Christianity was legalized with Galerius' Edict of Toleration in 311 followed by Constantine's Edict of Milan in 313, after Emperor Constantine himself had become a Christian. The Arian Controversy began only five years later in 318 when Arius, who was in charge of one of the churches in Alexandria, publicly criticized his bishop, Alexander for "carelessness in blurring the distinction of nature between the Father and the Son by his emphasis on eternal generation".
The Trinitarian historian Socrates of Constantinople reports that Arius sparked the controversy that bears his name when Alexander of Alexandria, who had succeeded Achillas as the Bishop of Alexandria, gave a sermon stating the similarity of the Son to the Father. Arius interpreted Alexander's speech as being a revival of Sabellianism, condemned it, and then argued that "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 [the Son] had his substance from nothing." This quote describes the essence of Arius's doctrine.
Socrates of Constantinople believed that Arius was influenced in his thinking by the teachings of Lucian of Antioch, a celebrated Christian teacher and martyr. In a letter to Patriarch Alexander of Constantinople, Alexander of Alexandria wrote that Arius derived his theology from Lucian. The express purpose of the letter was to complain about the doctrines that Arius was spreading, but his charge of heresy against Arius is vague and unsupported by other authorities. Furthermore, Alexander's language, like that of most controversialists in those days, is quite bitter and abusive. Moreover, even Alexander never accused Lucian of having taught Arianism.
Supporters Arius's real following was limited to Alexandria. For example, his book, the Thalia, circulated only locally.“The Thalia appears … to have circulated only in Alexandria; what is known of him elsewhere seems to stem from Athanasius’ quotations” (Ayres, Lewis, Nicaea and its legacy, An Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology (2004), pp. 56-57). However, after Alexander excommunicated him, he appealed to the Eastern Church and found support. He was supported by Eusebius of Nicomedia,Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, “was a supporter of Arius as long as Arius lived” (Hanson, R.P.C., The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God (1987), pp. 30-31). who effectively was the leader of the Eastern Church.Eusebius of Nicomedia "virtually took charge of the affairs of the Greek-speaking Eastern Church from 328 until his death” (Hanson, R.P.C., The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God (1987), p. 29). Arius was also supported by Eusebius of Caesarea,Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, “was certainly an early supporter of Arius” Hanson, R.P.C., The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God (1987), p. 46). the church historian and theologian, one of the most influential authors of the fourth century.Eusebius of Caesarea, was “universally acknowledged to be the most scholarly bishop of his day” (Hanson, R.P.C., The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God (1987), p. 46),
"We cannot accordingly describe Eusebius (of Caesarea) as a formal Arian in the sense that he knew and accepted the full logic of Arius, or of Asterius' position. But undoubtedly, he approached it nearly."
Origen and Arius
Like many third-century Christian scholars, Arius was influenced by the writings of Origen, widely regarded as the first great theologian of Christianity. However, while both agreed on the subordination of the Son to the Father, and Arius drew support from Origen's theories on the Logos, the two did not agree on everything. For example:
Hanson refers several times to Origen's teaching that the Son always existed, for example, "Origen's doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son by the Father." To contrast this with what Arius taught, Hanson states that Arius taught that 'there was a time when he did not exist'." "Arius in the Thalia sees the Son as praising the Father in heaven; Origen generally avoids language suggesting that the Son worships the Father as God."
Hanson concluded:"Arius probably inherited some terms and even some ideas from Origen, ... he certainly did not adopt any large or significant part of Origen's theology." "He was not without influence from Origen, but cannot seriously be called an Origenist."However, because Origen's theological speculations were often proffered to stimulate further inquiry rather than to put an end to any given dispute, both Arius and his opponents were able to invoke the authority of this revered (at the time) theologian during their debate.
Divine but not fully divine