“During the early years of the fourth century, a heated controversy raged between the Arians (named after Arius, their leader), and the Trinitarians, led by Athanasius. The Arians maintained that Jesus is a created being, pre-existent, though having a beginning in time, a son in the normal sense of the word, and subordinate to the Father. The Athanasian party argued that the Son is fully God, co-equal and co-eternal with the Father.
Fearing that religious dissension might disrupt the political unity of the Empire, the Emperor Constantine summoned a general council of bishops to settle the dispute. Meeting at Nice in 325 A.D., the council upheld the teachings of Athanasius and formulated the Nicene Creed. Although it is argued that it was Athanasius’s youth and his being well versed in both philosophy and literature, combined with his ability and energy, which swayed the Council to decide in his favor, in truth the final decision in this matter was decided neither by the council nor Athanasius, no this the first great ecumenical council, was not only summoned and presided over, by the Roman emperor himself (a former pagan and recent convert to Christianity), but he also patronized it, and undertook to direct it. He intervened in the theological discussion, and used the authority of the State to compel assent to the concept of multiple gods in one—multiple gods to suit Greek polytheism (paganism), one god to suit Biblical (or Christian) teaching.
Arius was excommunicated and banished, along with those of the bishops who held out against the decision of the majority and the threats of the Emperor.
The basic Trinitarian position was finally forged at the Council of Constantinople, A.D. 381, where the Holy Spirit was declared to be a divine person, although Harnack states that in the third century the majority of Christians believed it was merely a divine power, the spirit of the Father (2). At the Council of Ephesus, A.D. 431, and again at Chalcedon in 450 A.D., Jesus was asserted to be eternally both human and divine, a unity of two natures (expressly forbidden by God). The Council of Ephesus, incidentally, added Mary as a supplement to the Trinity, declaring that she should be received and honored as Theotokos, “Mother of God.”
Thus the controversy on the nature of God was settled, or so orthodox historians would have us believe. And thus, we are told, the Holy Spirit guided the church into an understanding of the truth. In point of fact, however, these councils, settled very little. Other councils met as well and upheld Arianism! The fortunes of both sides seesawed according to the politics of the Empire. Whenever the Arians were dominant, they persecuted the Trinitarians; and when their fortunes were reversed, the Trinitarians persecuted them. The eventual result was not so much the outcome of rational debate and pious scholarship as of power politics and shedding of blood. By the start of the eighth century, Arianism was externally suppressed, (3) for the Trinitarians proved to be more efficient in killing the Arians than the latter were in killing them. Thus was orthodoxy established. And the most avid defender of holy tradition cannot deny that, had the Arians been militarily successful, their position would have become the standard of orthodoxy instead of that of their opponents.
The Trinitarian consensus, imposed by force of arms, related more to a formula than to the actual substance of belief. The doctrine of the Trinity was simultaneously declared to be a deep mystery, which nobody can understand, and a dogma, which must be accepted to obtain salvation.
It is very much possible that Arius’ anti-Trinitarian views would not have been thought so heretical at that time had he not been so openly opposed to church hierarchy, to the doctrine of the Nicolaitans (Rev 2:6, 15), which was infesting the church at that time.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..........................................................
(2) [Ibid. p. 266.]
(3) McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House), Vol. 1, p. 392, 1895. (Likewise a Trinitarian source)
Fearing that religious dissension might disrupt the political unity of the Empire, the Emperor Constantine summoned a general council of bishops to settle the dispute. Meeting at Nice in 325 A.D., the council upheld the teachings of Athanasius and formulated the Nicene Creed. Although it is argued that it was Athanasius’s youth and his being well versed in both philosophy and literature, combined with his ability and energy, which swayed the Council to decide in his favor, in truth the final decision in this matter was decided neither by the council nor Athanasius, no this the first great ecumenical council, was not only summoned and presided over, by the Roman emperor himself (a former pagan and recent convert to Christianity), but he also patronized it, and undertook to direct it. He intervened in the theological discussion, and used the authority of the State to compel assent to the concept of multiple gods in one—multiple gods to suit Greek polytheism (paganism), one god to suit Biblical (or Christian) teaching.
Arius was excommunicated and banished, along with those of the bishops who held out against the decision of the majority and the threats of the Emperor.
The basic Trinitarian position was finally forged at the Council of Constantinople, A.D. 381, where the Holy Spirit was declared to be a divine person, although Harnack states that in the third century the majority of Christians believed it was merely a divine power, the spirit of the Father (2). At the Council of Ephesus, A.D. 431, and again at Chalcedon in 450 A.D., Jesus was asserted to be eternally both human and divine, a unity of two natures (expressly forbidden by God). The Council of Ephesus, incidentally, added Mary as a supplement to the Trinity, declaring that she should be received and honored as Theotokos, “Mother of God.”
Thus the controversy on the nature of God was settled, or so orthodox historians would have us believe. And thus, we are told, the Holy Spirit guided the church into an understanding of the truth. In point of fact, however, these councils, settled very little. Other councils met as well and upheld Arianism! The fortunes of both sides seesawed according to the politics of the Empire. Whenever the Arians were dominant, they persecuted the Trinitarians; and when their fortunes were reversed, the Trinitarians persecuted them. The eventual result was not so much the outcome of rational debate and pious scholarship as of power politics and shedding of blood. By the start of the eighth century, Arianism was externally suppressed, (3) for the Trinitarians proved to be more efficient in killing the Arians than the latter were in killing them. Thus was orthodoxy established. And the most avid defender of holy tradition cannot deny that, had the Arians been militarily successful, their position would have become the standard of orthodoxy instead of that of their opponents.
The Trinitarian consensus, imposed by force of arms, related more to a formula than to the actual substance of belief. The doctrine of the Trinity was simultaneously declared to be a deep mystery, which nobody can understand, and a dogma, which must be accepted to obtain salvation.
It is very much possible that Arius’ anti-Trinitarian views would not have been thought so heretical at that time had he not been so openly opposed to church hierarchy, to the doctrine of the Nicolaitans (Rev 2:6, 15), which was infesting the church at that time.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..........................................................
(2) [Ibid. p. 266.]
(3) McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House), Vol. 1, p. 392, 1895. (Likewise a Trinitarian source)
