Misplaced Pages

Arian controversy: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:54, 2 September 2008 editRomanHistory (talk | contribs)38 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 06:11, 10 January 2025 edit undo2600:1008:b079:7fce:a872:26b2:4aaf:c666 (talk)No edit summaryTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit 
(397 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Series of Christian disputes}}
The '''Arian controversy''' describes several controversies which divided the ] ] from before the ] in ] to after the ] in ]. The most important of these controversies concerned the relationship between the Creator and Logos, or between ] and ].
{{Arianism}} {{Arianism}}
The '''Arian controversy''' was a series of ] disputes about the nature of ] that began with a dispute between ] and ], two ] from ]. The most important of these controversies concerned the relationship between the substance of ] and the substance of His Son.


], through the Council of Nicaea in 325, attempted to unite Christianity and establish a single, imperially approved version of the faith. Ironically, his efforts were the cause of the deep divisions created by the disputes after Nicaea.<ref>{{cite book | author=Papandrea, James Leonard | title=Reading the Early Church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=FWM1bqkLtQQC | page=177| isbn=9780809147519 | year=2012 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book | editor=Smither, Edward L. | title=Rethinking Constantine: History, Theology, and Legacy | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wJANBQAAQBAJ | page=65–66| isbn=9781630873851 | date=2014-02-14 }}</ref>
==History==
{{Expand-section|date=June 2008}}


These disagreements divided the ] into various factions for over 55 years, from the time before the ] in 325 until after the ] in 381. There was no formal ].
===Origins of the controversy===
{{see|Synods of Antioch}}
{{Expand-section|date=June 2008}}


Inside the Roman Empire, the ] faction ultimately gained the upper hand through the ], issued on 27 February AD 380, which made Nicene Christology the ] of the ],<ref>Ehler, Sidney Zdeneck; Morrall, John B (1967). Church and State Through the Centuries: A Collection of Historic Documents with Commentaries. p. 6-7. ] ]. Archived</ref> and through strict enforcement of that edict. However, outside the Roman Empire, ] and other forms of ] continued to be preached for some time (without the blessing of the Empire), but it was eventually killed off. The modern ] and the ], as well as all Protestant denominations, have generally followed the Trinitarian formulation, though each has its own specific theology on the matter.<ref>{{cite book | author=Dunner, Joseph | title=Handbook of world history: concepts and issues | year=1967 | page=70}}</ref><ref>{{cite book | author=Campbell, Ted | title=Christian Confessions: A Historical Introduction | year=1996 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=p2mUxxxGt_sC | page=41| isbn=9780664256500 }}</ref>
====Lucian of Antioch====
{{main|Lucian of Antioch}}
{{Unreferencedsection|date=August 2007}}


==History==
It is believed that Arius' doctrines were influenced by the teachings of Lucian of Antioch, a celebrated Christian teacher and martyr for the faith. In a letter to Bishop ] of ], ] wrote that Arius derived his theology from Lucian. The express purpose of his letter is to complain of the doctrines Arius was then diffusing but his charge of heresy against Arius is vague and unsupported by other authorities, and Alexander's language, like that of most controversialists in those days, is vituperative. Moreover, Lucian is not stated, even by Alexander himself, to have fallen into the heresy afterwards promulgated by Arius, but is accused ''ad invidiam'' of heretical tendencies.


===The controversy begins=== ===Beginnings===
The early history of the controversy must be pieced together from about 35 documents found in various sources. The ] historian ] reports that ] first became controversial under the bishop ], when Arius formulated the following ]: <blockquote>"If the Father begat the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence: hence it is that there was when the Son was not. It follows then of necessity that he had his existence from the non-existence".<ref>{{cite book |editor1-last=Bettenson |editor1-first=Henry |title=Documents of the Christian Church |date=1963 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=New York |page=40 |edition=2nd}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Noll |first1=Mark A. |title=Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity |date=2012 |publisher=Baker Academic |location=Grand Rapids, MI |isbn=978-0-8010-3996-6 |page=45 |edition=3rd}}.</ref></blockquote>Bishop Alexander of Alexandria was criticised for his slow reaction against Arius. Like his predecessor, Dionysius, he has been charged with vacillation. According to ]'s work, ], the controversy had spread from Alexandria into almost all the African regions, and was considered a disturbance of the public order by the Roman Empire. ] (Constantine I) sent two letters to Arius and Bishop Alexander, asking the religious leaders to stop the controversy.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Life of Constantine|last=Eusebius, of Caesarea, Bishop of Caesarea, approximately 260-approximately 340.|date=1999|publisher=Clarendon Press|others=Cameron, Averil., Hall, Stuart George.|isbn=1423767667|location=Oxford|oclc=67703212}}</ref> The ongoing controversy led to Constantine's oversight of the First Council of Nicaea.


==First Council of Nicaea (325)==
The early history of the controversy must be pieced together from about found in various sources. The historian ] reports that Arius first became controversial under the bishop ], when he made the following syllogism: he said, "‘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 had his substance from nothing.’"
{{Main|First Council of Nicaea}}
], with Arius depicted beneath the feet of emperor ] and the ]s]]
Arianism would not be contained within the Alexandrian ]. By the time Bishop Alexander finally acted against his presbyter, Arius's doctrine had spread far beyond his own see; it had become a topic of discussion—and disturbance—for the entire Church.


The Church was now a powerful force in the Roman world, with Constantine I having legalized it in 313 through the ]. "Constantine desired that the church should contribute to the social and moral strength of the empire, religious dissension was a menace to the public welfare."<ref>{{Cite book|last=Boyd|first=William Kenneth|url=http://archive.org/details/ecclesiasticale00kenngoog|title=The Ecclesiastical Edicts of the Theodosian Code|date=1905|publisher=Columbia University Press|others=Harvard University|language=English}}</ref> Consequently, the emperor had taken a personal interest in several ecumenical issues, including the ] controversy in 316. He also wanted to bring an end to the Arian dispute.
The patriarch of Alexandria was the subject of adverse criticism for his slow reaction against Arius. Like his predecessor Dionysius, he has been charged with vacillation. Yet it is difficult to see how he could have acted otherwise than he did. The question that Arius raised had been left unsettled two generations previously, or, if in any sense it could be said to have been settled, it had been settled in favour of the opponents of the '']''. Therefore Alexander allowed the controversy to continue until he felt that it had become dangerous to the peace of the Church. Then he called a council of bishops and sought their advice. Once they decided against Arius, Alexander delayed no longer. He deposed Arius from his office, and excommunicated both him and his supporters.


To this end, the emperor sent bishop ] to investigate and, if possible, resolve the controversy. Hosius was armed with an open letter from the Emperor: ''"Wherefore let each one of you, showing consideration for the other, listen to the impartial exhortation of your fellow-servant."'' As the debate continued to rage despite Hosius' efforts, Constantine in AD 325 took an unprecedented step: he called an ] at Nicaea composed of church ]s from all parts of the empire to resolve this issue, possibly at Hosius' recommendation.<ref name="ellopos">{{cite book|last=Vasiliev|first=Al|title=History of the Byzantine Empire|year=1928|chapter-url=http://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/vasilief/arianism-council-nicaea.asp|access-date=2 May 2012|chapter=The empire from Constantine the Great to Justinian}}</ref> It is traditionally said that 318 bishops came to Nicaea to attend the council, though others suggest figures from 250-300. The vast majority of those bishops were from the East. Italy, Spain, Gaul, North Africa, Persia, and Scythia each sent one bishop.<ref>{{Citation|last=Gwynn|first=David M.|title=Reconstructing the Council of Nicaea|date=2021-01-07|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/9781108613200%23CN-bp-5/type/book_part|work=The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea|pages=90–110|editor-last=Kim|editor-first=Young Richard|edition=1|publisher=Cambridge University Press|doi=10.1017/9781108613200.005|isbn=978-1-108-61320-0|access-date=2021-09-28}}</ref>
===The Council of Nicaea (325)===
{{main|Council of Nicaea}}


], himself too aged to attend, sent two priests as his delegates. Arius himself attended the council as well as the young deacon Athanasius, who attended as an assistant to Alexander of Alexandria<ref>{{Citation|last=Gwynn|first=David M.|title=Reconstructing the Council of Nicaea|date=2021-01-07|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/9781108613200%23CN-bp-5/type/book_part|work=The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea|pages=90–110|editor-last=Kim|editor-first=Young Richard|edition=1|publisher=Cambridge University Press|doi=10.1017/9781108613200.005|isbn=978-1-108-61320-0|access-date=2021-09-28}}</ref> and who would become the champion of the Nicene Creed and spend most of his life battling ] and other form of ]. Also there were ] of Caesarea and ]. Before the main conclave convened, Hosius initially met with Alexander and his supporters at ].<ref>{{cite book|last=Photius|title=Epitome of Book I|chapter-url=http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/fathers/philostorgius.html|author-link=Photios I of Constantinople|access-date=2 May 2012|chapter=Epitome of Chapter VII}}</ref> The council was presided over by the emperor himself, who participated in and even led some of its discussions.<ref name="ellopos" />
===Ariminum, Seleucia, and Constantinople (358-360)===
{{Main|Council of Rimini|Council of Seleucia|First Council of Constantinople (360)}}


Those who upheld the notion that Christ was co-eternal and con-substantial with the Father were led by the young archdeacon Athanasius. Those who instead insisted that the Son of God came after God the Father in time and substance, were led by Arius the presbyter. For about two months, the two sides argued and debated,<ref>{{cite journal|title=Babylon the Great Has Fallen|url=https://archive.org/details/babylongreathasf00watc|url-access=registration|journal=God's Kingdom Rules!|year=1963|page=|publisher=Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc.}}</ref> with each appealing to Scripture to justify their respective positions. Arius maintained that the Son of God was a Creature, made from nothing; and that he was God's First Production, before all ages. And he argued that everything else was created through the Son. Thus, said Arius, only the Son was directly created and begotten of God; furthermore, there was a time that He had no existence. He was capable of His own free will, said Arius, and thus "were He in the truest sense a son, He must have come after the Father, therefore the time obviously was when He was not, and hence He was a finite being."<ref>{{cite book|last=M'Clintock|first=John|title=Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature|author2=James Strong|page=45|volume=7}}</ref>
In ], the emperor ] requested two councils, one of the western bishops at ] and one of the eastern bishops at ].<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 10.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 37.</ref>


According to some accounts in the ] of ], debate at the council became so heated that at one point, he slapped Arius in the face.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.stnicholascenter.org/pages/bishop-nicholas-loses-his-cool/|title=St. Nicholas Center ::: Bishop Nicholas Loses His Cool|website=www.stnicholascenter.org|access-date=2019-06-14}}</ref> The majority of the bishops at the council ultimately agreed upon a creed, known thereafter as the ] formulated at the first council of Nicaea. It included the word ''homoousios'', meaning "consubstantial", or "same in essence<ref>{{Cite web|title=homoousios {{!}} Definition, History, & Importance|url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/homoousios|access-date=2021-09-04|website=Encyclopedia Britannica|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=What is the meaning of homoousious?|url=https://www.gotquestions.org/homoousious.html|access-date=2021-09-04|website=GotQuestions.org|language=en}}</ref>", which was incompatible with Arius' beliefs.<ref name="Carroll">{{cite book|last=Carroll|first=A|title=History of Christendom, Volume II|page=12}}</ref> On June 19, 325, council and emperor issued a circular to the churches in and around Alexandria: Arius and two of his unyielding partisans (Theonas and Secundus)<ref name="Carroll" /> were deposed and exiled to ], while three other supporters—], Eusebius of Nicomedia and Maris of Chalcedon—affixed their signatures solely out of deference to the emperor. However, Constantine soon found reason to suspect the sincerity of these three, for he later included them in the sentence pronounced on Arius.{{citation needed|date=December 2013}}
In ], the western council met at Ariminum. ] and ] declared that the Son was like the father "according to the scriptures," following a new (Homoian) creed drafted at Sirmium (]). Many of the most outspoken supporters of the Creed of Nicaea walked out. The council, including some supporters of the older creed, adopted the newer creed.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 10.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 37.</ref> After the council, ] condemned the creed of Ariminum, while his rival, ], supported it.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 40.</ref>


===Ariminum, Seleucia, and Constantinople (358–360)===
An earthquake struck Nicomedia, killing the bishop ], and in ] the eastern council met at ] instead. The council was bitterly divided, and procedurally irregular, and the two parties met separately and reached opposing decisions. ] and his party declared that the Son was of similar substance to the Father, following a (Homoiousian) Creed of Antioch from ], and deposed the opposing party. ] declared that the Son was like the Father, introducing a new (Homoian) creed.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 11.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 40.</ref>
{{Main|Council of Ariminum|Council of Seleucia|Council of Constantinople (360)}}


In 358, the emperor ] requested two councils, one of the western bishops at Ariminum (now ] in ]) and one of the eastern bishops at ].<ref name="ReferenceA">Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 10.</ref><ref name="ReferenceB">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 37.</ref>
Constantius requested a third council, at Constantinople (]), of both the eastern and western bishops, to resolve the split at Seleucia. Acacius now declared that the Son was like the Father "according to the scriptures." Basil of Ancyra, ], and their party again declared that the Son was of similar substance to the Father, as in the majority decision at Seleucia. ], ], and the deacons ] and ] declared that the Son was of a dissimilar substance from the Father.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 12 and book 5, chapter 1.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 41.</ref> The Heteroousians defeated the Homoiousians in an initial debate, but Constantius banished Aëtius,<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 12 and book 5, chapter 1.</ref> after which the council, including Maris and Eudoxius,<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 41.</ref> agreed to the homoian creed of Ariminum with minor modifications.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 12 and book 5, chapter 1.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 41.</ref>


In 359, the western council met at Ariminum. ] and ], following the new creed drafted at Sirmium (359), proposed that, "''according to the scriptures''," the Son was "'''''like the Father'''''." This is known as the ] view which held that the Bible does not reveal whether the Son is of the same substance as the Father and we, therefore, should not speculate about such things. This view is in opposition to the "''of the same substance''" (Homoousios) view of the Nicene Creed. The council, including some supporters of the older creed, accepted this proposal.<ref name="ReferenceA" /><ref name="ReferenceB" /> After the council, ] condemned the creed of Ariminum, while his rival, ], supported it.<ref name="constantinople1">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 40.</ref>
After the Council of Constantinople, the homoian bishop Acacius deposed and banished several homoiousian bishops, including ], Basil, Eustathius, ], ], ], ], ] and ].<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 5, chapter 1.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 42.</ref> At the same time, Acacius also deposed and banished the Anomoean deacon Aëtius.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 5, chapter 1.</ref>


An ], and in 359 the eastern council met at ] instead. The council was bitterly divided and procedurally irregular, and the two parties met separately and reached opposing decisions. Following the ] view, ] declared that the Son was "''like the Father''".<ref name="constantinople1" /><ref name="ecclesiastical1">Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 11.</ref> But ] and his party, following a (Homoiousian) Creed of Antioch from 341, declared that the Son was of "'''''similar substance'''''" to the Father. The majority at Seleucia accepted the "''similar substance''" view and deposed the opposing party.
In ], Acacius appointed ] to replace Macedonius and ] to replace Basil, as well as ] to replace Cecropius, who had died in the earthquake at Nicomedia.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 5, chapter 1.</ref>


Constantius did not accept this outcome and requested a third council, at Constantinople (359), of both the eastern and western bishops, to resolve the split at Seleucia. Acacius and Basil of Ancyra, respectively, again proposed the "''like the Father''" and "''similar substance''" views, as were explained at Seleucia. However, ] of Chalcedon, ], and the deacons ] and ] proposed a third view which was similar to Arius' teachings, namely that the Son was of "''a '''dissimilar substance'''''" from the Father.<ref name="ecclesiastical2">Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 12 and book 5, chapter 1.</ref><ref name="constantinople2">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 41.</ref> The Heteroousians ("''dissimilar substance''") won the victory over the other two views in an initial debate. However, Constantius was not willing to accept this outcome either. He intervened and banished Aëtius;<ref name="ecclesiastical2" /> one of the leading proponents of the "''dissimilar substance''" view. After this, the council, including Maris and Eudoxius,<ref name="constantinople2" /> agreed to a fourth view, namely the homoian ("''like the Father''") view that was already agreed to at Ariminum. They made only minor modifications to the Ariminum creed.<ref name="ecclesiastical2" /><ref name="constantinople2" />
===The controversy in the 360s===
In ], Constantius died and ] became sole Roman emperor. Julian demanded the restoration of several pagan temples which Christians had seized or destroyed.<ref>Henry Chadwick, History of the Early Church, chapter 9</ref>
According to Philostorgius, pagans killed ], bishop of ], allowing ] to reclaim the see.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 7, chapter 2.</ref>


After the Council of Constantinople, the homoian bishop Acacius deposed and banished several homoiousian bishops, including ], Basil, Eustathius, ], ], ], ], ] and ].<ref name="ecclesiastical3">Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 5, chapter 1.</ref><ref name="constantinople3">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 42.</ref> At the same time, Acacius also deposed and banished the Anomoean deacon Aëtius.<ref name="ecclesiastical3" />
===The Council of Constantinople (383)===
===Councils involved===
{{Expand-section|date=June 2008}}
Several church councils were largely, if not primarily, concerned with the Arian controversy. These include:
* ] 264-269, councils rejected the term ]
* Egyptian ] (] or ]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 6.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Council of the party of ] at Nicomedia (c. ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 1, chapter 7.</ref>
* Council of the party of ] at Antioch (]).{{Fact|date=August 2007}}<ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* ] (more than 300 bishops) (]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 1, chapters 8-9.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 8-13.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Church trial of ] at Antioch (c. ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 2, chapter 7.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 24.</ref>
* ] (250 bishops) (c. ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 2, chapter 7.</ref>
* Church trial of ] at Tyre (]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 2, chapter 11.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 28-32, 34-35.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* ] (]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 33.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Church trial of ] at Constantinople (]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Church trial of ] at Antioch (]).{{Fact|date=August 2007}}<ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Council of Antioch (Council of the Dedication) (90 bishops) (]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 8 & 10.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Another Council of Antioch (]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 15.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Western ] (]).{{Fact|date=July 2007}}
* Mostly Western ] (] or ]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 20 & 26.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Eastern ] (] or ]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 20 & 26.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Eastern ] (]).{{Fact|date=August 2007}}<ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Regional ].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 24.</ref>
* Mostly Western ] (]).{{Fact|date=August 2007}}<ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Mostly Western ] (]).{{Fact|date=August 2007}}<ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* ] (]).{{Fact|date=August 2007}}
* Egyptian ] (c. ]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 26.</ref>
* ] and church trial of ] at Sirmium (]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 29-30.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* ] (]).{{Fact|date=August 2007}}<ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Mostly Western ] (more than 300 bishops) (]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 36.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* ] (]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 3.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* ] (]).{{Fact|date=August 2007}}<ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Fourth ] (]).{{Fact|date=August 2007}}<ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Western ] (about 300 or more than 400 bishops) (]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapters 10-11.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 37.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Eastern ] (about 160 bishops) (]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapters 10-11.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 37 & 39.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Council of the Homoians at Nike (c. ]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 37.</ref>
* ] (]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 12.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 41.</ref><ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Church trial of ] at Constantinople (c. ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 6, chapter 1.</ref>
* Church trial of ] at Gangra.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 43.</ref>
* Council of the Anomoeans in Constantinople (c. ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 7, chapter 6.</ref>
* Local council at Constantinople (c. ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 7, chapter 6.</ref>
* Council of Antioch (]).{{Fact|date=August 2007}}<ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* Council of the Anomoeans in Constantinople (c. ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2.</ref>
* Council of the party of ] (c. ] or ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 4.</ref>
* Local council at Antioch (c. ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 10, chapter 1.</ref>
* ] (] or ]).<ref>Anthony F. Beavers, ''Chronology of the Arian Controversy''.</ref>
* ] (Of the churches in Hispania) (]).


In 360, Acacius appointed ] to replace Macedonius and ] to replace Basil, as well as ] to replace Cecropius, who had died in the earthquake at Nicomedia.<ref name="ecclesiastical3"/>
==Issues==
{{Expand-section|date=June 2008}}
===Is the Logos created?===
{{Expand-section|date=June 2008}}
===Was the Logos created in time?===
{{Expand-section|date=June 2008}}
===Personhood of the Holy Spirit===
{{Expand-section|date=June 2008}}
{{Unreferencedsection|date=April 2008}}


===The controversy in the 360s===
Dominating the secular intellectual milieu in which the Cappadocians lived was Platonism, which, when mixed with unreflective Christian theology, bred Arianism, the most prominent heresy at the dawn of the fourth century. According to Platonism, the One or “first cause” radiated immaterial and material entities in a hierarchical, categorized way. If this conceptualization had remained unchecked, the Christian God could have been given a Platonic veneer: the Father as the “first cause,” the Son or Logos as the primary emanation from the One, and the Spirit as a further emanation of the Logos. Arianism held that the Son of God was a being created by the First Person and could not be considered divine, an attractive option incorporating both classical Greek thought and the historical event of the person of Jesus. The Cappadocians vehemently argued against Arianism for its inequality among the divine Persons: “This was the disease of Arius, who gave his name to the madness, and who threw into confusion and brought to ruin a great part of the Church. Without honoring the Father, he dishonored what proceeded from Him by maintaining unequal degrees in the Godhead. But we recognize one glory of the Father, the equality of the Only-begotten, and one glory of the Son, the equality of the Holy Spirit. And we believe that to subordinate anything of the Three is to destroy the whole” (Gregory of Nazianzus, On St. Basil, par. 30.). The Cappadocian insistence on equality among the divine Persons was also a solid refutation of the hierarchical ordering of the cosmos found in Platonism.
In 361, Constantius died and ] became sole Roman emperor. Julian demanded the restoration of several pagan temples which Christians had seized or destroyed.<ref>Henry Chadwick, History of the Early Church, chapter 9</ref> According to ], pagans killed ], bishop of ], allowing Athanasius to reclaim the 'see', or ecclesiastical jurisdiction.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 7, chapter 2.</ref>


==Sides==
According to a heresy{{POV-statement|date=June 2008}} related to Arianism, Anomoianism, the Spirit was subjugated to the Father and the Son. As time went on, arguing for the divinity of the Spirit became increasingly more important to the Cappadocians. Nicaea left rather open the question of the divinity of the Spirit; belief “in the Holy Spirit” was all the bishops had stated. Advocating for the divinity of the Holy Spirit was crucial for the Cappadocians exactly because of their insistence on the unity and equality of the Three: “The central thrust of Basil’s positive argument in favor of the Spirit’s deity is the non-separability of the three persons and the inference from this that they are all three worthy of this same honor” Anthony Meredith, The Cappadocians (Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1995), 32).


The Cappadocians’ insistence on three co-equal divine Persons, however, subjected them to accusations of tritheism. The extreme opposite, Sabellianism, also widespread at that time, conflated the three Persons into one and saw no distinctions among them whatsoever. The theologians, therefore, had to articulate the unity of the divine essence as well as the distinctness of Persons in the Godhead.

As time went on and in response to continual controversy, the Cappadocians’ theological writings increased in nuance and also in clarity. What emerged from them was the orthodox Christian belief that God is a unity of Three distinct yet inseparable and equal Persons. The Cappadocian theologians worked out this theology by establishing the distinctness of the divine Persons, the communitarian relationships of the Three, and the unity of their divine essence.

''This section submitted by Claire Anderson, M.Div.''

===Other Issues===
Several other issues arose at the same time as the Arian controversy proper.

====Dates of Passover and Easter====
{{main|Quartodecimanism}}
In Christianity, ] is the Sunday and Monday after ]. However, it was debated whether to follow Jewish practice for the calculation of the date of Passover. By the 4th century, the most common Christian methods had diverged from the most common Jewish ones.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 8.</ref>

====Marriage====
Many held that presbyters and bishops should not marry, and some held that presbyters and bishops who had already married, and their wives, should refrain from sex.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 11.</ref>

] condemned marriage entirely; he also excluded married presbyters from communion, forbade married Christians from praying at home while encouraging unmarried ones to hold services at home; he was deposed for this and his doctrines were condemned.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 43.</ref>

==Sides==
{{Expand-section|date=June 2008}}
===Homoousian=== ===Homoousian===
{{see also|Homoousion}} {{Main|Homoousion}}
The Homoousians taught that the Son is of the same substance as the Father, i.e. both uncreated. The ] form had been condemned as heresy in the 3rd century. The ] form would be declared orthodox at the Council of Constantinople in 383, and has become the basis of most of modern ].<ref>Bernhard Lohse, ''A Short History of Christian Doctrine'', pp. 56-59 & 63.<br>Peter Heather & John Matthews, ''Goths in the Fourth Century'', pp. 127-128. This mainly discusses the later controversy and only mentions Athanasius' form.</ref> The Homoousians taught that the Son is of the same substance as the Father, i.e. both uncreated. The ] form had been condemned as heresy in the 3rd century by Pope Calixtus.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/Sabellianism|title=Sabellianism {{!}} Christianity|website=Encyclopedia Britannica|language=en|access-date=2020-03-03}}</ref> The ] form would be declared orthodox at the Council of Constantinople in 383, and has become the basis of most of modern ].<ref>Bernhard Lohse, ''A Short History of Christian Doctrine'', pp. 56-59 & 63.<br />Peter Heather & John Matthews, ''Goths in the Fourth Century'', pp. 127-128. This mainly discusses the later controversy and only mentions Athanasius' form.</ref>
*], bishop of ] (]-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 5 & 6.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (313-326).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 5 & 6.</ref>
*], bishop of ] (?-(]).<ref>Socrates of Constantintinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 7 and book 2, chapter 31.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (?-359).<ref>Socrates of Constantintinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 7 and book 2, chapter 31.</ref>
*], bishop of ] (c. ]-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 21.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (c. 313-339).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 21.</ref>
*], (possibly Sabellian) bishop of ] (c. ]-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 25.</ref> * ], (possibly Sabellian) bishop of ] (c. 325-330).<ref name="constantinople10">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 25.</ref>
*], (possibly Sabellian) bishop of ].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 25.</ref> * ], (possibly Sabellian) bishop of ].<ref name="constantinople10"/>
*] (Athanasian) bishop of Alexandria (]-], later rival of Gregory of Cappadocia and then George of Laodicea).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 23, 27-32 & 34-35.</ref> * ] (Athanasian) bishop of Alexandria (326-373, later rival of Gregory of Cappadocia and then George of Laodicea).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 23, 27-32 & 34-35.</ref>
*], bishop of Constantinople (]-], later rival of Eusebius of Nicomedia and then Macedonius I of Constantinople).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 6-7, 12 & 16.</ref> * ], bishop of Constantinople (336-351, later rival of Eusebius of Nicomedia and then Macedonius I of Constantinople).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 6-7, 12 & 16.</ref>
*], bishop of ] (]-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 15.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (337-352).<ref name="constantinople5">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 15.</ref>
*], bishop of ].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 23.</ref> * ], bishop of ].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 23.</ref>
*], bishop of ] (?-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 23 & 26.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (?-351).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 23 & 26.</ref>
*], bishop of ] (]-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 24 & 38.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (333-350).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 24 & 38.</ref>
*], bishop of ], who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 36.</ref> * ], bishop of ], who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.<ref name="constantinople7">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 36.</ref>
*], bishop of ], who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 36.</ref> * ], bishop of ]{{clarify|date=August 2020}}, who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.<ref name="constantinople7"/>
*], bishop of ] (]-]), who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 36.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (340-371), who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.<ref name="constantinople7"/>
* ], (Novatian) bishop of Constantinople.<ref name="constantinople11">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 38.</ref>
* ]{{Citation needed|date=July 2007}}
*], (Novatian) bishop of Constantinople.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 38.</ref>
* ]{{Citation needed|date=July 2007}}

*]{{Fact|date=July 2007}} * ], bishop of ].{{Citation needed|date=July 2007}}
*]{{Fact|date=July 2007}} * ], bishop of ] (c. 353-367).{{Citation needed|date=July 2007}}
*], bishop of ].{{Fact|date=July 2007}} * ], bishop of ].{{Citation needed|date=July 2007}}
*], bishop of ] (c. ]-]).{{Fact|date=July 2007}}
*], bishop of ].{{Fact|date=July 2007}}


===Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium=== ===Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium===
According to the historian ], ] and ] taught "that Christ was a mere man."<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36 and book 2, chapter 20<br />Socrates, book 1, chapter 36, states that Marcellus "dared to say, as the Samosatene had done, that Christ was a mere man" and book 2, chapter 18, states that Photinus "asserted that the Son of God was a mere man."</ref> Their opponents associated the teachings of Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium with those of ] and ], which had been widely rejected before the controversy.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36 and book 2, chapter 29.<br />Sozomen, ''Church History'', book 4, chapter 6.<br />Besides these histories, Eunomius' ''First Apology'' associates Marcellus' and Photinus' doctrines with Sabellius, and condemns these doctrines.'</ref>
{{Missing information|Eusebius' criticisms of Marcellus' theology, Athanasius' defense of Marcellus, and modern scholarly research on these figures|date=March 2008}}
According to the historian ], ] and ] of Sirmium taught "that Christ was a mere man."<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36 and book 2, chapter 20<br>Socrates, book 1, chapter 36, states that Marcellus "dared to say, as the Samosatene had done, that Christ was a mere man" and book 2, chapter 18, states that Photinus "asserted that the Son of God was a mere man."</ref> Their opponents associated the teachings of Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium with those of ] and ], which had been widely rejected before the controversy.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36 and book 2, chapter 29.<br>Sozomen, ''Church History'', book 4, chapter 6.<br>Besides these histories, Eunomius' ''First Apology'' associates Marcellus' and Photinus' doctrines with Sabellius, and condemns these doctrines.'</ref>


*Marcellus, bishop of ] (?-] and c. ]-c. ]) and critic of Asterius.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36 and book 2, chapter 20.</ref> * Marcellus, bishop of ] (?-336 and c. 343-c. 374) and critic of Asterius.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36 and book 2, chapter 20.</ref>
*Photinus, bishop of ] (?-]) and in exile (]-]); according to Socrates of Constantinople and Sozomen, Photinus was a follower of Marcellus.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 18 & 29.<br>Sozomen, ''Church History'', book 4, chapter 6.</ref> * Photinus, bishop of ] (?-351) and in exile (351-376); according to Socrates of Constantinople and Sozomen, Photinus was a follower of Marcellus.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 18 & 29.<br />Sozomen, ''Church History'', book 4, chapter 6.</ref>
* In 336, a church trial at Constantinople deposed Marcellus and condemned his doctrines.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36.<br />Sozomen, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 33.</ref>

* ] supported Marcellus and called for his restoration.<ref name="constantinople5"/>
* In 336, a church trial at Constantinople deposed Marcellus and condemned his doctrines.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36.<br>Sozomen, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 33.</ref>
* ] supported Marcellus and called for his restoration.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 15.</ref> * In 342 or 343, the mostly Western ] restored Marcellus, while the mostly Eastern ] sustained his removal.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 20.<br />Sozomen, ''Church History'', book 3, chapters 11-12.</ref>
* In 342 or 343, the mostly Western ] restored Marcellus, while the mostly Eastern ] sustained his removal.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 20.<br>Sozomen, ''Church History'', book 3, chapters 11-12.</ref> * Under pressure from his co-Emperor ], ] initially backed the decision of Sardica, but after Constans' death, reversed course.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 23 & 26.<br />Sozomen, ''Church History'', book 4, chapter 2.</ref>
* Under pressure from his co-Emperor ], ] initially backed the decision of Sardica, but after Constans' death, reversed course.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 23 & 26.<br>Sozomen, ''Church Hustory'', book 4, chapter 2.</ref> * In 351,{{Citation needed|date=August 2007}} a church trial at the ] deposed Photinus and condemned his teachings.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 29-30.<br />Sozomen, ''Church History'', book 4, chapter 6.</ref>
* In 351,{{Fact|date=August 2007}} a church trial at the ] deposed Photinus and condemned his teachings.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 29-30.<br>Sozomen, ''Church History'', book 4, chapter 6.</ref> * The Macrostich condemned the teachings of Marcellus and Photinus.<ref name="constantinople12">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 19.</ref>
* The Macrostich condemned the teachings of Marcellus and Photinus.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 19.</ref>


===Homoiousian=== ===Homoiousian===
{{Main|Homoiousian}}
The Homoiousian school taught that the Son is of a similar substance to the Father.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 9.</ref><ref>Peter Heather & John Matthews, ''Goths in the Fourth Century'', p. 128. This mainly discusses the later controversy.</ref>
The Homoiousian school taught that the Son is of a similar substance to the Father but not the same.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 9.</ref><ref name="Peter Heather p. 128">Peter Heather & John Matthews, ''Goths in the Fourth Century'', p. 128. This mainly discusses the later controversy.</ref>


*], bishop of ] (]-]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 17.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36 & book 2, chapter 42.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (336-360).<ref name="ecclesiastical9">Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 17.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36 & book 2, chapter 42.</ref>
*], (Macedonian) bishop of ] (]-] and ]-]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 9 & book 8, chapter 17.</ref><ref>Socrates if Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 16, 27, 38 & 42.</ref> * ], (Macedonian) bishop of ] (342-346 and 351-360).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 9 & book 8, chapter 17.</ref><ref>Socrates if Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 16, 27, 38 & 42.</ref>
*], bishop of Alexandria (]-], rival of Athanasius of Alexandria).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 17.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 24 & 40.</ref> * ], bishop of Alexandria (356-361, rival of Athanasius of Alexandria).<ref name="ecclesiastical9"/><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 24 & 40.</ref>
*], bishop of ] (?-]), ] (]-]), and ] (]-]), who supported the ].<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapters 4 & 12.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 19, 37 & 40.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (?-358), ] (358-359), and ] (360-370), who supported the ].<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapters 4 & 12.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 19, 37 & 40.</ref>
*], who supported the Macrostich.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 19.</ref> * ], who supported the Macrostich.<ref name="constantinople12"/>
*], bishop of ], who supported the Macrostich.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 19.</ref> * ], bishop of ], who supported the Macrostich.<ref name="constantinople12"/>
*], bishop of ], who wrote the Creed of Sirmium of 351.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 30.</ref> * ], bishop of ], who wrote the Creed of Sirmium of 351.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 30.</ref>
*], (Macedonian) bishop of Jerusalem (]-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 38 & 42.</ref> * ], (Macedonian) bishop of Jerusalem (350-386).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 38 & 42.</ref>
*], (Macedonian) bishop of Nicomedia (c. ]-?).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 38 & 45.</ref> * ], (Macedonian) bishop of Nicomedia (c. 351-?).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 38 & 45.</ref>
*], (Macedonian) bishop of ] (c. ]-]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 17.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 38, 42 & 45.</ref> * ], (Macedonian) bishop of ] (c. 351-360).<ref name="ecclesiastical9"/><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 38, 42 & 45.</ref>
*], (Macedonian) bishop of ] (?-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 39, 40, 42 & 45.</ref> * ], (Macedonian) bishop of ] (?-360).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 39, 40, 42 & 45.</ref>
*], bishop of ] (?-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 42.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (?-360).<ref name="constantinople3"/>
*], bishop of ] (?-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 42.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (?-360).<ref name="constantinople3"/>
*], bishop of ] (?-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 42.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (?-360).<ref name="constantinople3"/>
*], (Macedonian) bishop of ].<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 17.</ref><ref>Socrates of Connstantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 45.</ref> * ], (Macedonian) bishop of ].<ref name="ecclesiastical9"/><ref>Socrates of Connstantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 45.</ref>
*].<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 11.</ref> * ].<ref name="ecclesiastical1"/>
*], Macedonian bishop of ].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 8 and book 2, chapter 15.</ref> * ], Macedonian bishop of ].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 8 and book 2, chapter 15.</ref>


===Homoian=== ===Homoian===
{{see also|Acacians}} {{See also|Acacians}}


The Homoians taught that the Son is similar to the Father, either "in all things" or "according to the scriptures," without speaking of substance.<ref>Peter Heather & John Matthews, ''Goths in the Fourth Century'', p. 128. This mainly discusses the later controversy.</ref> Several members of the other schools, such as Hosius of Cordoba and Aëtius, also accepted certain Homoian formulae.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 3 for Hosius and chapter 8 for Aëtius.</ref> The Homoians taught that the Son is similar to the Father, either "in all things" or "according to the scriptures," without speaking of substance.<ref name="Peter Heather p. 128"/> Several members of the other schools, such as Hosius of Cordoba and Aëtius, also accepted certain Homoian formulae.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 3 for Hosius and chapter 8 for Aëtius.</ref>


*], initially homoiousian, then homoousian, and later homoian bishop of ], who had opposed Athanasius.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 27 and book 2, chapters 12 & 37.</ref> * ], initially homoiousian, then homoousian, and later homoian bishop of ], who had opposed Athanasius.<ref name="constantinople13">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 27 and book 2, chapters 12 & 37.</ref>
*], initially homoiousian, then homoousian, and later homoian bishop of ], who had opposed Athanasius.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 27 and book 2, chapters 12 & 37.</ref> * ], initially homoiousian, then homoousian, and later homoian bishop of ], who had opposed Athanasius.<ref name="constantinople13"/>
*].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 37.</ref> * ].<ref name="ReferenceB" />
*] (d. ]), bishop of Milan.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 37.</ref> * ] (died 374), bishop of Milan.<ref name="ReferenceB" />
*], bishop of ] (?-]) and ] (]-]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 9, chapter 19.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 37.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (?-370) and ] (370-380).<ref name="ecclesiastical10">Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 9, chapter 19.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 37.</ref>
* ].<ref name="ReferenceB" />
*].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 37.</ref>
*], bishop of ] (]-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 4, 39 & 40.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (340-366).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 4, 39 & 40.</ref>


===Heteroousian=== ===Heteroousian===
{{see also|Anomoeanism}} {{See also|Anomoeanism}}
The Heteroousians taught that the Son is of a different substance from the Father, i.e. created. Arius had taught this early in the controversy, and Aëtius would teach the later Anomoean form.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 3, chapter 5, book 4, chapter 12 and book 6, chapter 5 refer to "different substance," book 4, chapter 12 refers to "dissimilarity of substance," and book 4, chapters 4 & 12 and book 5, chapter 1 refer to "unlike in substance" or "unlikeness in substance."</ref><ref>Peter Heather & John Matthews, ''Goths in the Fourth Century'', pp. 127-128. This mainly discusses the later controversy and only mentions Anomoeanism, without using the term Heteroousian.</ref> The Heteroousians taught that the Son is of a different substance from the Father, i.e. created. Arius had taught this early in the controversy, and Aëtius would teach the later Anomoean form.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 3, chapter 5, book 4, chapter 12 and book 6, chapter 5 refer to "different substance," book 4, chapter 12 refers to "dissimilarity of substance," and book 4, chapters 4 & 12 and book 5, chapter 1 refer to "unlike in substance" or "unlikeness in substance."</ref><ref>Peter Heather & John Matthews, ''Goths in the Fourth Century'', pp. 127-128. This mainly discusses the later controversy and only mentions Anomoeanism, without using the term Heteroousian.</ref>


*], presbyter in Alexandria.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 5-6.</ref> * ], presbyter in Alexandria.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 5-6.</ref>
*], who later supported Aëtius.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 3, chapter 5 and book 8, chapter 2.</ref> * ], who later supported Aëtius.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 3, chapter 5 and book 8, chapter 2.</ref>
*], who founded the Anomoean tradition, later bishop (]-?).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 7, chapter 6.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 35.</ref> * ], who founded the Anomoean tradition, later bishop (361-?).<ref name="ecclesiastical6">Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 7, chapter 6.</ref><ref name="constantinople14">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 35.</ref>
*], (Anomoean) bishop of ] (?-c. ]) and ] (c. ]-c. ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2 and book 9, chapter 18.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 40.</ref> * ], (Anomoean) bishop of ] (?-c. 363) and ] (c. 363-c. 379).<ref name="constantinople1"/><ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2 and book 9, chapter 18.</ref>
*], (Anomoean) bishop of ] (]-]) and exiled bishop (]-c. ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 5, chapter 3 and book 6, chapters 1-3.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 35.</ref> * ], (Anomoean) bishop of ] (360-361) and exiled bishop (361-c. 393).<ref name="constantinople14"/><ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 5, chapter 3 and book 6, chapters 1-3.</ref>
*], (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. ], at the same time as ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2.</ref> * ], (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. 363, at the same time as ]).<ref name="ecclesiastical7">Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2.</ref>
*], (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. ]-?).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2.</ref> * ], (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. 363-?).<ref name="ecclesiastical7"/>
*], (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. ]-?).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2.</ref> * ], (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. 363-?).<ref name="ecclesiastical7"/>
*], (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. ]-?, at the same time as ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2.</ref> * ], (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. 363-?, at the same time as ]).<ref name="ecclesiastical7"/>
*], (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. ]-?, at the same time as ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2.</ref> * ], (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. 363-?, at the same time as ]).<ref name="ecclesiastical7"/>
*], (Anomoean) bishop of ], the ] and ], (c. ]-?).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2.</ref> * ], (Anomoean) bishop of ], the ] and ], (c. 363-?).<ref name="ecclesiastical7"/>
*], (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. ]-?).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2.</ref> * Julian, (Anomoean) bishop of ], (c. 363-?).<ref name="ecclesiastical7"/>
*], ], and ], (Anomoean) bishops of Egypt, (c. ]-?).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 2.</ref> * ], ], and Heliodorus, (Anomoean) bishops of Egypt, (c. 363-?).<ref name="ecclesiastical7"/>
*], (Anomoean) historian. * ], (Anomoean) historian.


===Other critics of the Creed of Nicaea=== ===Other critics of the Creed of Nicaea===
Many critics of the "Nicene" Creed cannot be clearly associated with one school, often due to lack of sources, or due to contradictions between sources. Many critics of the "Nicene" Creed cannot be clearly associated with one school, often due to lack of sources, or due to contradictions between sources.


*], bishop of ], who supported Arius at Nicaea.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 1, chapter 9.</ref><ref>Condemned by ], see Socrates, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 6.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 8.</ref> * ], bishop of ], who supported Arius at Nicaea.<ref name="constantinople9">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 8.</ref><ref name="ecclesiastical11">Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 1, chapter 9.</ref><ref name="autogenerated1">Condemned by ], see Socrates, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 6.</ref>
*], bishop of ], who supported Arius at Nicaea.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 1, chapter 9.</ref><ref>Condemned by ], see Socrates, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 6.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 8.</ref> * ], bishop of ], who supported Arius at Nicaea.<ref name="constantinople9"/><ref name="ecclesiastical11"/><ref name="autogenerated1"/>
*], bishop of ], ] (?-] and ]-]) and ] (]-], rival of Paul I of Constantinople), who supported Arius at Nicaea.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 1, chapter 9.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 6, 8 & 14, and book 2, chapter 7.</ref> * ], bishop of ], ] (?-325 and 328-338) and ] (338-341, rival of Paul I of Constantinople), who supported Arius at Nicaea.<ref name="ecclesiastical11"/><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 6, 8 & 14, and book 2, chapter 7.</ref>
*], bishop of ], who supported Arius at Nicaea.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 1, chapter 9.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 6, 8 & 14.</ref> * ], bishop of ], who supported Arius at Nicaea.<ref name="ecclesiastical11"/><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapters 6, 8 & 14.</ref>
*], bishop of ], who supported Arius at Nicaea.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 1, chapter 9 and book 4, chapter 12.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 8.</ref> * ], bishop of ], who supported Arius at Nicaea.<ref name="constantinople9"/><ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 1, chapter 9 and book 4, chapter 12.</ref>
*], (possibly Homoiousian, possibly Sabellian) bishop of ] (c. ] or ]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 9.</ref> * ], (possibly Homoiousian, possibly Sabellian) bishop of ] (c. 339 or 341).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 9.</ref>
*], bishop of Alexandria (]-], rival of Athanasius of Alexandria).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 10-11.</ref> * ], bishop of Alexandria (339-346, rival of Athanasius of Alexandria).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 10-11.</ref>
*], bishop of ].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 26.</ref> * ], bishop of ].<ref name="constantinople6">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 26.</ref>
*], bishop of Antioch (]-]).<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 26.</ref> * ], bishop of Antioch (342-344).<ref name="constantinople6"/>
*], bishop of Antioch (]-]), who also taught Aetius.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 3, chapter 17.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 26 & 35.</ref> * ], bishop of Antioch (344-358), who also taught Aetius.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 3, chapter 17.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 26 & 35.</ref>
*] of ].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 38.</ref> * ].<ref name="constantinople11"/>
* ] (d. c. 341), who, according to Socrates of Constantinople, considered Jesus as example of the power of God, and according to Philostorgius, defended the Homoiousian tradition.<ref name="constantinople4">Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36.</ref><ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 4.</ref>

*] (d. c. ]), who, according to Socrates of Constantinople, considered Jesus as example of the power of God, and according to Philostorgius, defended the Homoiousian tradition.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 4, chapter 4.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 36.</ref> * ], who taught Aetius.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 3, chapter 15.</ref>
*], who taught Aetius.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 3, chapter 15.</ref> * ] (died 383), first bishop of the ] (341?-c.383), and Bible translator, who agreed to the Homoian formula at Constantinople.<ref name="constantinople2"/><ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 2, chapter 5.</ref>
* ], ''papa'' and ''bilaifs'' respectively, and Gothic ]s.
*] (d. ]), first bishop of the ] (]?-c.]), and Bible translator, who agreed to the Homoian formula at Constantinople.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 2, chapter 5.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 41.</ref>
* ], later bishop of Milan, Wulfila's adopted son.<ref name="Matthews, pp. 135-136">Heather and Matthews, ''Goths in the Fourth Century'', pp. 135-136.</ref>
*], ''papa'' and ''bilaifs'' respectively, and Gothic ].
*], later bishop of Milan, Wulfila's adopted son.<ref>Heather and Matthews, ''Goths in the Fourth Century'', pp. 135-136.</ref> * ], bishop of ].<ref name="Matthews, pp. 135-136"/>
*], bishop of ].<ref>Heather and Matthews, ''Goths in the Fourth Century'', pp. 135-136.</ref> * ], bishop of ].<ref name="Matthews, pp. 135-136"/>
*], bishop of ].<ref>Heather and Matthews, ''Goths in the Fourth Century'', pp. 135-136.</ref>


===Unclassified=== ===Unclassified===
*], deacon and supporter of Arius; later Homoian bishop of ] (]-], at the same time as ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 5, chapter 5, book 8, chapter 2 and book 9, chapter 4.</ref><ref>Condemned by ], see Socrates, ''Church History'', book 1, chapter 6.</ref> * ], deacon and supporter of Arius; later Homoian bishop of ] (361-378, at the same time as ]).<ref name="autogenerated1"/><ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 5, chapter 5, book 8, chapter 2 and book 9, chapter 4.</ref>
*] or ], Homoiousian and later Homoian bishop of ] (?-]) and ], (]-], at the same time as ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 17 and book 9, chapter 14.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 12.</ref> * ] or ], Homoiousian and later Homoian bishop of ] (?-378) and ], (378-381, at the same time as ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 17 and book 9, chapter 14.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 12.</ref>
*], bishop of Tyre.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 39 & 40.</ref> * ], bishop of Tyre.<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapters 39 & 40.</ref>
*], bishop of ] (]-?).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 5, chapter 1.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (359-?).<ref name="ecclesiastical3"/>
*], bishop of ] (]-?, at the same time as ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 5, chapter 1.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (359-?, at the same time as ]).<ref name="ecclesiastical3"/>
*], bishop of ] (]-?, at the same time as ]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 5, chapter 1.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (359-?, at the same time as ]).<ref name="ecclesiastical3"/>
* ], bishop of ].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 39.</ref>

*], bishop of ].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 39.</ref> * ], bishop of ] (?-380).<ref name="ecclesiastical10"/>
* ], bishop of ].<ref name="constantinople1"/><ref name="ecclesiastical6"/>
*], bishop of ] (?-]).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 9, chapter 19.</ref>
*], bishop of ].<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 7, chapter 6.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 40.</ref> * ], a bishop of Philadelphia in ].<ref name="constantinople1"/><ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 3.</ref>
*], a bishop of Philadelphia in ].<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 8, chapter 3.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 40.</ref> * ], Anomean bishop of ] (c. 379-?).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 9, chapter 18.</ref>
* ], bishop of ].<ref name="constantinople1"/>
*], Anomean bishop of ] (c. ]-?).<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 9, chapter 18.</ref>
* ], presbyter in Antioch, possibly the same as an Asterius who supported Acacius at Seleucia.<ref name="constantinople1"/><ref name="ecclesiastical8">Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 10, chapter 1.</ref>
*], bishop of ].<ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 40.</ref>
*], presbyter in Antioch, possibly the same as an Asterius who supported Acacius at Seleucia.<ref>Philostorgius, in Photius, ''Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius'', book 10, chapter 1.</ref><ref>Socrates of Constantinople, ''Church History'', book 2, chapter 40.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist}}


==See also== ==See also==
{{Portal|Catholicism}}
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
Line 268: Line 184:
* ] * ]
* ] * ]

* ]
==References==
{{Reflist|30em}}
==Further reading==
* Rusch, William G., and Robert C. Saler. . 1517 Media, 1980.


==External links== ==External links==
# '''''The Arians Of The Fourth Century''''' by John Henry Cardinal Newman
*
## — this is the version originally referenced in this article. Its pages do not identify bibliographic data. As of December 2016 the third-millennium-library.com site was unavailable, and the domain was offered for sale.
*
##* '''''Note:''' The links to the archived sub-documents of this archived page do not resolve correctly. Here are the correct archived links:''
##* PART I. Doctrinal
##** Chapter I. Schools And Parties In And About The Ante-Nicene Church, In Their Relation To The Arian Heresy.
##***
##***
##***
##***
##***
##** Chapter II.—The Teaching Of The Ante-Nicene Church In Its Relation To The Arian Heresy.
##***
##***
##***
##***
##***
##* PART II. Historical
##** Chapter III.—The Ecumenical Council Of Nicea In The Reign Constantine.
##***
##***
##** Chapter IV—Councils In The Reign Of Constantius.
##***
##*** ''(Note: The top-level page of this document mis-labels this section as "The Athanasians.)''
##***
##***
##** Chapter V.—Councils After The Reign Of Constantius.
##***
##***
##** CHAPTER VI.—The Councils Of Constantinple
##***
## – The author's notes for this 3rd edition identify the following differences, among others:
##* "Some additions have been made to the footnotes."
##* "A few longer Notes, for the most part extracted from other publications of , form an Appendix."
##* "The Table of Contents, and the Chronological Table have both been enlarged."
#
#* ''Archive: ''
#
#* ''Archive: ''


{{History of the Catholic Church}}
]
{{History of Christianity}}
]
]


{{DEFAULTSORT:Arian Controversy}}
]
]

Latest revision as of 06:11, 10 January 2025

Series of Christian disputes
Part of a series of articles on
Arianism
History and theology
Arian leaders
Other Arians
Modern semi-Arians
Opponents
icon Christianity portal

The Arian controversy was a series of Christian disputes about the nature of Christ that began with a dispute between Arius and Athanasius of Alexandria, two Christian theologians from Alexandria, Egypt. The most important of these controversies concerned the relationship between the substance of God the Father and the substance of His Son.

Emperor Constantine, through the Council of Nicaea in 325, attempted to unite Christianity and establish a single, imperially approved version of the faith. Ironically, his efforts were the cause of the deep divisions created by the disputes after Nicaea.

These disagreements divided the Church into various factions for over 55 years, from the time before the First Council of Nicaea in 325 until after the First Council of Constantinople in 381. There was no formal schism.

Inside the Roman Empire, the Trinitarian faction ultimately gained the upper hand through the Edict of Thessalonica, issued on 27 February AD 380, which made Nicene Christology the state religion of the Roman Empire, and through strict enforcement of that edict. However, outside the Roman Empire, Arianism and other forms of Unitarianism continued to be preached for some time (without the blessing of the Empire), but it was eventually killed off. The modern Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, as well as all Protestant denominations, have generally followed the Trinitarian formulation, though each has its own specific theology on the matter.

History

Beginnings

The early history of the controversy must be pieced together from about 35 documents found in various sources. The Trinitarian historian Socrates of Constantinople reports that Arius first became controversial under the bishop Alexander of Alexandria, when Arius formulated the following syllogism:

"If the Father begat the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence: hence it is that there was when the Son was not. It follows then of necessity that he had his existence from the non-existence".

Bishop Alexander of Alexandria was criticised for his slow reaction against Arius. Like his predecessor, Dionysius, he has been charged with vacillation. According to Eusebius's work, The Life of Constantine, the controversy had spread from Alexandria into almost all the African regions, and was considered a disturbance of the public order by the Roman Empire. Constantine the Great (Constantine I) sent two letters to Arius and Bishop Alexander, asking the religious leaders to stop the controversy. The ongoing controversy led to Constantine's oversight of the First Council of Nicaea.

First Council of Nicaea (325)

Main article: First Council of Nicaea
The First Council of Nicaea, with Arius depicted beneath the feet of emperor Constantine the Great and the bishops

Arianism would not be contained within the Alexandrian diocese. By the time Bishop Alexander finally acted against his presbyter, Arius's doctrine had spread far beyond his own see; it had become a topic of discussion—and disturbance—for the entire Church.

The Church was now a powerful force in the Roman world, with Constantine I having legalized it in 313 through the Edict of Milan. "Constantine desired that the church should contribute to the social and moral strength of the empire, religious dissension was a menace to the public welfare." Consequently, the emperor had taken a personal interest in several ecumenical issues, including the Donatist controversy in 316. He also wanted to bring an end to the Arian dispute.

To this end, the emperor sent bishop Hosius of Corduba to investigate and, if possible, resolve the controversy. Hosius was armed with an open letter from the Emperor: "Wherefore let each one of you, showing consideration for the other, listen to the impartial exhortation of your fellow-servant." As the debate continued to rage despite Hosius' efforts, Constantine in AD 325 took an unprecedented step: he called an ecumenical council at Nicaea composed of church prelates from all parts of the empire to resolve this issue, possibly at Hosius' recommendation. It is traditionally said that 318 bishops came to Nicaea to attend the council, though others suggest figures from 250-300. The vast majority of those bishops were from the East. Italy, Spain, Gaul, North Africa, Persia, and Scythia each sent one bishop.

Pope Sylvester I, himself too aged to attend, sent two priests as his delegates. Arius himself attended the council as well as the young deacon Athanasius, who attended as an assistant to Alexander of Alexandria and who would become the champion of the Nicene Creed and spend most of his life battling Arianism and other form of Unitarianism. Also there were Eusebius of Caesarea and Eusebius of Nicomedia. Before the main conclave convened, Hosius initially met with Alexander and his supporters at Nicomedia. The council was presided over by the emperor himself, who participated in and even led some of its discussions.

Those who upheld the notion that Christ was co-eternal and con-substantial with the Father were led by the young archdeacon Athanasius. Those who instead insisted that the Son of God came after God the Father in time and substance, were led by Arius the presbyter. For about two months, the two sides argued and debated, with each appealing to Scripture to justify their respective positions. Arius maintained that the Son of God was a Creature, made from nothing; and that he was God's First Production, before all ages. And he argued that everything else was created through the Son. Thus, said Arius, only the Son was directly created and begotten of God; furthermore, there was a time that He had no existence. He was capable of His own free will, said Arius, and thus "were He in the truest sense a son, He must have come after the Father, therefore the time obviously was when He was not, and hence He was a finite being."

According to some accounts in the hagiography of Saint Nicholas, debate at the council became so heated that at one point, he slapped Arius in the face. The majority of the bishops at the council ultimately agreed upon a creed, known thereafter as the Nicene Creed formulated at the first council of Nicaea. It included the word homoousios, meaning "consubstantial", or "same in essence", which was incompatible with Arius' beliefs. On June 19, 325, council and emperor issued a circular to the churches in and around Alexandria: Arius and two of his unyielding partisans (Theonas and Secundus) were deposed and exiled to Illyricum, while three other supporters—Theognis of Nicaea, Eusebius of Nicomedia and Maris of Chalcedon—affixed their signatures solely out of deference to the emperor. However, Constantine soon found reason to suspect the sincerity of these three, for he later included them in the sentence pronounced on Arius.

Ariminum, Seleucia, and Constantinople (358–360)

Main articles: Council of Ariminum, Council of Seleucia, and Council of Constantinople (360)

In 358, the emperor Constantius II requested two councils, one of the western bishops at Ariminum (now Rimini in Northern Italy) and one of the eastern bishops at Nicomedia.

In 359, the western council met at Ariminum. Ursacius of Singidunum and Valens of Mursa, following the new creed drafted at Sirmium (359), proposed that, "according to the scriptures," the Son was "like the Father." This is known as the Homoian view which held that the Bible does not reveal whether the Son is of the same substance as the Father and we, therefore, should not speculate about such things. This view is in opposition to the "of the same substance" (Homoousios) view of the Nicene Creed. The council, including some supporters of the older creed, accepted this proposal. After the council, Pope Liberius condemned the creed of Ariminum, while his rival, Pope Felix II, supported it.

An earthquake struck Nicomedia, and in 359 the eastern council met at Seleucia Isauria instead. The council was bitterly divided and procedurally irregular, and the two parties met separately and reached opposing decisions. Following the Homoian view, Acacius of Caesarea declared that the Son was "like the Father". But Basil of Ancyra and his party, following a (Homoiousian) Creed of Antioch from 341, declared that the Son was of "similar substance" to the Father. The majority at Seleucia accepted the "similar substance" view and deposed the opposing party.

Constantius did not accept this outcome and requested a third council, at Constantinople (359), of both the eastern and western bishops, to resolve the split at Seleucia. Acacius and Basil of Ancyra, respectively, again proposed the "like the Father" and "similar substance" views, as were explained at Seleucia. However, Maris of Chalcedon, Eudoxius of Antioch, and the deacons Aëtius of Antioch and Eunomius of Cyzicus proposed a third view which was similar to Arius' teachings, namely that the Son was of "a dissimilar substance" from the Father. The Heteroousians ("dissimilar substance") won the victory over the other two views in an initial debate. However, Constantius was not willing to accept this outcome either. He intervened and banished Aëtius; one of the leading proponents of the "dissimilar substance" view. After this, the council, including Maris and Eudoxius, agreed to a fourth view, namely the homoian ("like the Father") view that was already agreed to at Ariminum. They made only minor modifications to the Ariminum creed.

After the Council of Constantinople, the homoian bishop Acacius deposed and banished several homoiousian bishops, including Macedonius I of Constantinople, Basil, Eustathius, Eleusius of Cyzicus, Dracontius of Pergamum, Neonas of Seleucia, Sophronius of Pompeiopolis, Elpidius of Satala and Cyril of Jerusalem. At the same time, Acacius also deposed and banished the Anomoean deacon Aëtius.

In 360, Acacius appointed Eudoxius of Antioch to replace Macedonius and Athanasius of Ancyra to replace Basil, as well as Onesimus of Nicomedia to replace Cecropius, who had died in the earthquake at Nicomedia.

The controversy in the 360s

In 361, Constantius died and Julian became sole Roman emperor. Julian demanded the restoration of several pagan temples which Christians had seized or destroyed. According to Philostorgius, pagans killed George of Laodicea, bishop of Alexandria, allowing Athanasius to reclaim the 'see', or ecclesiastical jurisdiction.

Sides

Homoousian

Main article: Homoousion

The Homoousians taught that the Son is of the same substance as the Father, i.e. both uncreated. The Sabellian form had been condemned as heresy in the 3rd century by Pope Calixtus. The Athanasian form would be declared orthodox at the Council of Constantinople in 383, and has become the basis of most of modern trinitarianism.

Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium

According to the historian Socrates of Constantinople, Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus taught "that Christ was a mere man." Their opponents associated the teachings of Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus of Sirmium with those of Sabellius and Paul of Samosata, which had been widely rejected before the controversy.

  • Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra (?-336 and c. 343-c. 374) and critic of Asterius.
  • Photinus, bishop of Sirmium (?-351) and in exile (351-376); according to Socrates of Constantinople and Sozomen, Photinus was a follower of Marcellus.
  • In 336, a church trial at Constantinople deposed Marcellus and condemned his doctrines.
  • Pope Julius I supported Marcellus and called for his restoration.
  • In 342 or 343, the mostly Western Council of Sardica restored Marcellus, while the mostly Eastern Council of Philippopolis sustained his removal.
  • Under pressure from his co-Emperor Constans, Constantius II initially backed the decision of Sardica, but after Constans' death, reversed course.
  • In 351, a church trial at the Second Council of Sirmium deposed Photinus and condemned his teachings.
  • The Macrostich condemned the teachings of Marcellus and Photinus.

Homoiousian

Main article: Homoiousian

The Homoiousian school taught that the Son is of a similar substance to the Father but not the same.

Homoian

See also: Acacians

The Homoians taught that the Son is similar to the Father, either "in all things" or "according to the scriptures," without speaking of substance. Several members of the other schools, such as Hosius of Cordoba and Aëtius, also accepted certain Homoian formulae.

Heteroousian

See also: Anomoeanism

The Heteroousians taught that the Son is of a different substance from the Father, i.e. created. Arius had taught this early in the controversy, and Aëtius would teach the later Anomoean form.

Other critics of the Creed of Nicaea

Many critics of the "Nicene" Creed cannot be clearly associated with one school, often due to lack of sources, or due to contradictions between sources.

Unclassified

See also

References

  1. Papandrea, James Leonard (2012). Reading the Early Church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea. p. 177. ISBN 9780809147519.
  2. Smither, Edward L., ed. (2014-02-14). Rethinking Constantine: History, Theology, and Legacy. p. 65–66. ISBN 9781630873851.
  3. Ehler, Sidney Zdeneck; Morrall, John B (1967). Church and State Through the Centuries: A Collection of Historic Documents with Commentaries. p. 6-7. ISBN 9780819601896. Archived
  4. Dunner, Joseph (1967). Handbook of world history: concepts and issues. p. 70.
  5. Campbell, Ted (1996). Christian Confessions: A Historical Introduction. p. 41. ISBN 9780664256500.
  6. Bettenson, Henry, ed. (1963). Documents of the Christian Church (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. p. 40.
  7. Noll, Mark A. (2012). Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity (3rd ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. p. 45. ISBN 978-0-8010-3996-6..
  8. Eusebius, of Caesarea, Bishop of Caesarea, approximately 260-approximately 340. (1999). Life of Constantine. Cameron, Averil., Hall, Stuart George. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 1423767667. OCLC 67703212.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  9. Boyd, William Kenneth (1905). The Ecclesiastical Edicts of the Theodosian Code. Harvard University. Columbia University Press.
  10. ^ Vasiliev, Al (1928). "The empire from Constantine the Great to Justinian". History of the Byzantine Empire. Retrieved 2 May 2012.
  11. Gwynn, David M. (2021-01-07), Kim, Young Richard (ed.), "Reconstructing the Council of Nicaea", The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea (1 ed.), Cambridge University Press, pp. 90–110, doi:10.1017/9781108613200.005, ISBN 978-1-108-61320-0, retrieved 2021-09-28
  12. Gwynn, David M. (2021-01-07), Kim, Young Richard (ed.), "Reconstructing the Council of Nicaea", The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea (1 ed.), Cambridge University Press, pp. 90–110, doi:10.1017/9781108613200.005, ISBN 978-1-108-61320-0, retrieved 2021-09-28
  13. Photius. "Epitome of Chapter VII". Epitome of Book I. Retrieved 2 May 2012.
  14. "Babylon the Great Has Fallen". God's Kingdom Rules!. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc.: 447 1963.
  15. M'Clintock, John; James Strong. Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature. Vol. 7. p. 45.
  16. "St. Nicholas Center ::: Bishop Nicholas Loses His Cool". www.stnicholascenter.org. Retrieved 2019-06-14.
  17. "homoousios | Definition, History, & Importance". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2021-09-04.
  18. "What is the meaning of homoousious?". GotQuestions.org. Retrieved 2021-09-04.
  19. ^ Carroll, A. History of Christendom, Volume II. p. 12.
  20. ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 10.
  21. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 37.
  22. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 40.
  23. ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 11.
  24. ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 12 and book 5, chapter 1.
  25. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 41.
  26. ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 5, chapter 1.
  27. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 42.
  28. Henry Chadwick, History of the Early Church, chapter 9
  29. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 7, chapter 2.
  30. "Sabellianism | Christianity". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2020-03-03.
  31. Bernhard Lohse, A Short History of Christian Doctrine, pp. 56-59 & 63.
    Peter Heather & John Matthews, Goths in the Fourth Century, pp. 127-128. This mainly discusses the later controversy and only mentions Athanasius' form.
  32. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 5 & 6.
  33. Socrates of Constantintinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 7 and book 2, chapter 31.
  34. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 21.
  35. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 25.
  36. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 23, 27-32 & 34-35.
  37. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 6-7, 12 & 16.
  38. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 15.
  39. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 23.
  40. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 23 & 26.
  41. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 24 & 38.
  42. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 36.
  43. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 38.
  44. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 36 and book 2, chapter 20
    Socrates, book 1, chapter 36, states that Marcellus "dared to say, as the Samosatene had done, that Christ was a mere man" and book 2, chapter 18, states that Photinus "asserted that the Son of God was a mere man."
  45. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 36 and book 2, chapter 29.
    Sozomen, Church History, book 4, chapter 6.
    Besides these histories, Eunomius' First Apology associates Marcellus' and Photinus' doctrines with Sabellius, and condemns these doctrines.'
  46. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 36 and book 2, chapter 20.
  47. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 18 & 29.
    Sozomen, Church History, book 4, chapter 6.
  48. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 36.
    Sozomen, Church History, book 2, chapter 33.
  49. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 20.
    Sozomen, Church History, book 3, chapters 11-12.
  50. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 23 & 26.
    Sozomen, Church History, book 4, chapter 2.
  51. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 29-30.
    Sozomen, Church History, book 4, chapter 6.
  52. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 19.
  53. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 9.
  54. ^ Peter Heather & John Matthews, Goths in the Fourth Century, p. 128. This mainly discusses the later controversy.
  55. ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 8, chapter 17.
  56. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 36 & book 2, chapter 42.
  57. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 9 & book 8, chapter 17.
  58. Socrates if Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 16, 27, 38 & 42.
  59. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 24 & 40.
  60. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapters 4 & 12.
  61. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 19, 37 & 40.
  62. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 30.
  63. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 38 & 42.
  64. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 38 & 45.
  65. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 38, 42 & 45.
  66. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 39, 40, 42 & 45.
  67. Socrates of Connstantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 45.
  68. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 8 and book 2, chapter 15.
  69. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 3 for Hosius and chapter 8 for Aëtius.
  70. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 27 and book 2, chapters 12 & 37.
  71. ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 9, chapter 19.
  72. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 37.
  73. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 4, 39 & 40.
  74. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 3, chapter 5, book 4, chapter 12 and book 6, chapter 5 refer to "different substance," book 4, chapter 12 refers to "dissimilarity of substance," and book 4, chapters 4 & 12 and book 5, chapter 1 refer to "unlike in substance" or "unlikeness in substance."
  75. Peter Heather & John Matthews, Goths in the Fourth Century, pp. 127-128. This mainly discusses the later controversy and only mentions Anomoeanism, without using the term Heteroousian.
  76. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 5-6.
  77. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 3, chapter 5 and book 8, chapter 2.
  78. ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 7, chapter 6.
  79. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 35.
  80. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 8, chapter 2 and book 9, chapter 18.
  81. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 5, chapter 3 and book 6, chapters 1-3.
  82. ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 8, chapter 2.
  83. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 8.
  84. ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 1, chapter 9.
  85. ^ Condemned by Alexander of Alexandria, see Socrates, Church History, book 1, chapter 6.
  86. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 6, 8 & 14, and book 2, chapter 7.
  87. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 6, 8 & 14.
  88. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 1, chapter 9 and book 4, chapter 12.
  89. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 9.
  90. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 10-11.
  91. ^ Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 26.
  92. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 3, chapter 17.
  93. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 26 & 35.
  94. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 36.
  95. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 4.
  96. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 3, chapter 15.
  97. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 2, chapter 5.
  98. ^ Heather and Matthews, Goths in the Fourth Century, pp. 135-136.
  99. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 5, chapter 5, book 8, chapter 2 and book 9, chapter 4.
  100. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 8, chapter 17 and book 9, chapter 14.
  101. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 12.
  102. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 39 & 40.
  103. Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 39.
  104. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 8, chapter 3.
  105. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 9, chapter 18.
  106. Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 10, chapter 1.

Further reading

External links

  1. The Arians Of The Fourth Century by John Henry Cardinal Newman
    1. As provided by the Third Millennium Library — this is the version originally referenced in this article. Its pages do not identify bibliographic data. As of December 2016 the third-millennium-library.com site was unavailable, and the domain was offered for sale.
    2. As provided by The National Institute for Newman Studies – The author's notes for this 3rd edition identify the following differences, among others:
      • "Some additions have been made to the footnotes."
      • "A few longer Notes, for the most part extracted from other publications of , form an Appendix."
      • "The Table of Contents, and the Chronological Table have both been enlarged."
  2. A Chronology of the Arian Controversy
  3. Documents of the Early Arian Controversy
History of the Catholic Church
General
Early Church
(30–325/476)
Origins and
Apostolic Age (30–100)
Ante-Nicene period (100–325)
Late antiquity
(313–476)
Great Church
(180–451)
Roman
state church
(380–451)
Early Middle Ages
High Middle Ages
Late Middle Ages
Protestant Reformation
Counter-Reformation
Baroque period to the
French Revolution
19th century
20th century
21st century
History of Christianity
Centuries
Origins and
Apostolic Age
Ante-Nicene
period
Late antiquity
(Great Church)
Catholicism
Eastern
Christianity
Middle Ages
Reformation
and
Protestantism
Lutheranism
Calvinism
Anglicanism
Anabaptism
1640–1789
1789–present
Category: