Arius

Arius (/əˈraɪəs, ˈɛəri-/; Koinē Greek: Ἄρειος, Áreios; 250 or 256–336) was a Libyan presbyter and ascetic, and priest in Baucalis in Alexandria, Egypt. His teachings about the nature of the Godhead in Christianity, which emphasized God the Father's uniqueness and Christ's subordination under the Father, and his opposition to what would become the dominant Christology, Homoousian Christology, made him a primary topic of the First Council of Nicaea, which was convened by Emperor Constantine the Great in 325.In addition, if any writing composed by Arius should be found, it should be handed over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated, but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by Arius, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offense, he shall be submitted for capital punishment.....'It was then Saturday, and Arius was expecting to assemble with the church on the day following: but divine retribution overtook his daring criminalities. For going out of the imperial palace, attended by a crowd of Eusebian partisans like guards, he paraded proudly through the midst of the city, attracting the notice of all the people. As he approached the place called Constantine's Forum, where the column of porphyry is erected, a terror arising from the remorse of conscience seized Arius, and with the terror a violent relaxation of the bowels: he therefore enquired whether there was a convenient place near, and being directed to the back of Constantine's Forum, he hastened thither. Soon after a faintness came over him, and together with the evacuations his bowels protruded, followed by a copious hemorrhage, and the descent of the smaller intestines: moreover portions of his spleen and liver were brought off in the effusion of blood, so that he almost immediately died. The scene of this catastrophe still is shown at Constantinople, as I have said, behind the shambles in the colonnade: and by persons going by pointing the finger at the place, there is a perpetual remembrance preserved of this extraordinary kind of death.But since many persons are disturbed by questions concerning what is called in Latin substantia, but in Greek ousia, that is, to make it understood more exactly, as to 'coessential', or what is called, 'like-in-essence', there ought to be no mention of any of these at all, nor exposition of them in the Church, for this reason and for this consideration, that in divine Scripture nothing is written about them, and that they are above men's knowledge and above men's understanding.That God was not always the Father, but that there was a period when he was not the Father; that the Word of God was not from eternity, but was made out of nothing; for that the ever-existing God ('the I AM'—the eternal One) made him who did not previously exist, out of nothing; wherefore there was a time when he did not exist, inasmuch as the Son is a creature and a work. That he is neither like the Father as it regards his essence, nor is by nature either the Father's true Word, or true Wisdom, but indeed one of his works and creatures, being erroneously called Word and Wisdom, since he was himself made of God's own Word and the Wisdom which is in God, whereby God both made all things and him also. Wherefore he is as to his nature mutable and susceptible of change, as all other rational creatures are: hence the Word is alien to and other than the essence of God; and the Father is inexplicable by the Son, and invisible to him, for neither does the Word perfectly and accurately know the Father, neither can he distinctly see him. The Son knows not the nature of his own essence: for he was made on our account, in order that God might create us by him, as by an instrument; nor would he ever have existed, unless God had wished to create us.God has not always been Father; there was a moment when he was alone, and was not yet Father: later he became so. The Son is not from eternity; he came from nothing.Αὐτὸς γοῦν ὁ θεὸς καθό ἐστιν ἄρρητος ἅπασιν ὑπάρχει.... And so God Himself, as he really is, is inexpressible to all.ἴσον οὐδὲ ὅμοιον, οὐχ ὁμόδοξον ἔχει μόνος οὗτος.He alone has no equal, no one similar (homoios), and no one of the same glory.ἀγέννητον δὲ αὐτόν φαμεν διὰ τὸν τὴν φύσιν γεννητόν·We call him unbegotten, in contrast to him who by nature is begotten.τοῦτον ἄναρχον ἀνυμνοῦμεν διὰ τὸν ἀρχὴν ἔχοντα,We praise him as without beginning in contrast to him who has a beginning.ἀίδιον δὲ αὐτὸν σέβομεν διὰ τὸν ἐν χρόνοις γεγαότα.We worship him as timeless, in contrast to him who in time has come to exist.ἀρχὴν τὸν υἰὸν ἔθηκε τῶν γενητῶν ὁ ἄναρχοςHe who is without beginning made the Son a beginning of created thingsκαὶ ἤνεγκεν εἰς υἱὸν ἑαυτῷ τόνδε τεκνοποιήσας,He produced him as a son for himself by begetting him.ἴδιον οὐδὲν ἔχει τοῦ θεοῦ καθ᾽¦ ὑπόστασιν ἰδιότητος,He has none of the distinct characteristics of God's own being (kat' hypostasis)οὐδὲ γάρ ἐστιν ἴσος, ἀλλ' οὐδὲ ὁμοούσιος αὐτῷ.For he is not equal to, nor is he of the same being (homoousios) as him.σοφὸς δέ ἐστιν ὁ θεός, ὅτι τῆς σοφίας διδάσκαλος αύτός.God is wise, for he himself is the teacher of Wisdomἱκανὴ δὲ ἀπόδειξις ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἀόρατος ἅπασι,Sufficient proof that God is invisible to all:τοῖς τε διὰ υἱοῦ καὶ αὐτῷ τῷ υἱῷ ἀόρατος ὁ αὐτός.He is invisible both to things which were made through the Son, and also to the Son himself.ῥητῶς δὲ λέχω, πῶς τῷ υἱῷ ὁρᾶται ὁ ἀόρατος·I will say specifically how the invisible is seen by the Son:τῇ δυνάμει ᾗ δύναται ὁ θεὸς ἰδεῖν· ἰδίοις τε μέτροιςby that power by which God is able to see, each according to his own measure,ὑπομένει ὁ υἱὸς ἰδεῖν τὸν πατέρα, ὡς θέμις ἐστίν.the Son can bear to see the Father, as is determinedἤγουν τριάς ἐστι δόξαις οὐχ ὁμοίαις, ἀνεπίμικτοι ἑαυταῖς εἰσιν αἱ ὑποστάσεις αὐτῶν,So there is a Triad, not in equal glories. Their beings (hypostaseis) are not mixed together among themselves.μία τῆς μιᾶς ἐνδοξοτέρα δόξαις ἐπ' ἄπειρον.As far as their glories, one infinitely more glorious than the other.ξένος τοῦ υἱοῦ κατ' οὐσίαν ὁ πατήρ, ὅτι ἄναρχος ὐπάρχει.The Father in his essence (ousia) is a foreigner to the Son, because he exists without beginning.σύνες ὅτι ἡ μονὰς ἦν, ἡ δυὰς δὲ οὐκ ἦν, πρὶν ὑπάρξῃ.Understand that the Monad was; but the Dyad was not before it came into existence.αὐτίκα γοῦν υἱοῦ μὴ ὄντος ὁ πατὴρ θεός ἐστι. It immediately follows that, although the Son did not exist, the Father was still God.λοιπὸν ὁ υἰὸς οὐκ ὢν (ὐπῆρξε δὲ θελήσει πατρῴᾳ)Hence the Son, not being came into existence by the Father's will,μονογενὴς θεός ἐστι καὶ ἑκατέρων ἀλλότριος οὗτος.He is the Only-begotten God, and this one is alien from othersἡ σοφία σοφία ὑπῆρξε σοφοῦ θεοῦ θελήσει.Wisdom came to be Wisdom by the will of the Wise God.επινοεῖται γοῦν μυρίαις ὅσαις ἐπινοίαις πνεῦμα, δύναμις, σοφία, Hence he is conceived in innumerable aspects. He is Spirit, Power, Wisdom,δόξα θεοῦ, ἀλήθειά τε καὶ εἰκὼν καὶ λόγος οὗτος. God's glory, Truth, Image, and Word.σύνες ὅτι καὶ ἀπαύγασμα καὶ φῶς ἐπινοεῖται.Understand that he is also conceived of as Radiance and Light.ἴσον μὲν τοῦ υἱοῦ γεννᾶν δυνατός ἐστιν ὁ κρείττων,The one who is superior is able to beget one equal to the Son,διαφορώτερον δὲ ἢ κρείττονα ἢ μείζονα οὐχί.But not someone more important, or superior, or greater.θεοῦ ¦ θελήσει ὁ υἱὸς ἡλίκος καὶ ὅσος ἐστίν,At God's will the Son has the greatness and qualities that he has.ἐξ ὅτε καὶ ἀφ' οὖ καὶ ἀπὸ τότε ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ὑπέστη,His existence from when and from whom and from then — are all from God.ἰσχυρὸς θεὸς ὢν τὸν κρείττονα ἐκ μέρους ὑμνεῖ. He, though strong God, praises in part (ek merous) his superior.συνελόντι εἰπεῖν τῷ υἱῷ ὁ θεὀς ἄρρητος ὑπάρχει·In brief, God is inexpressible to the Son.ἔστι γὰρ ἑαυτῷ ὅ ἐστι τοῦτ' ἔστιν ἄλεκτος,For he is in himself what he is, that is, indescribable,ὥστε οὐδὲν τῶν λεγομένων κατά τε κατάληψιν συνίει ἐξειπεῖν ὁ υἱός.So that the son does not comprehend any of these things or have the understanding to explain them.ἀδύνατα γὰρ αὐτῷ τὸν πατέρα τε ἐξιχνιάσει, ὅς ἐστιν ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ.For it is impossible for him to fathom the Father, who is by himself.αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁ υἱὸς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ οὐσίαν οὐκ οἶδεν,For the Son himself does not even know his own essence (ousia),υἱὸς γὰρ ὢν θελήσει πατρὸς ὑπῆρξεν ἀληθῶς.For being Son, his existence is most certainly at the will of the Father.τίς γοῦν λόγος συγχωρεῖ τὸν ἐκ πατρὸς ὄνταWhat reasoning allows, that he who is from the Father αὐτὸν τὸν γεννήσαντα γνῶναι ἐν καταλήψει;should comprehend and know his own parent?δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι τὸ αρχὴν ἔχον, τὸν ἄναρχον, ὡς ἔστιν,For clearly that which has a beginning ἐμπερινοῆσαι ἢ ἐμπεριδράξασθαι οὐχ οἷόν τέ ἐστιν.is not able to conceive of or grasp the existence of that which has no beginning.Αύτὸς γοῦν ὁ θεὸς καθό ἐστ' ἄρρετος ἅπασιν ὑπαρχειGod himself, therefore, in himself remains mysterious (ἄρρετος). ἴσον οὐ δὲ ὅμοιον, οὐχ ὁμόδοξον ἔχει μόνοσ οὗτοςHe alone has no equal, none like him, none of equal glory.ἀγένητον δ'αὐτόν φαμεν διὰ τὸν τὴν φύσιν γεννετόνWe call him unoriginated (ἀγένητον) in contrast to him who is originated by nature ... τοῦτον ... ἄναρχον ἀνυμνοῦμεν διὰ τὸν ἀρχὴν ἔχονταwe praise him as without beginning in contrast to him who has a beginning,ἀΐδιον δ'αὐτὸν σέβομεν διὰ τὸν ἐν χρόνοις γεγαότα.we worship him as eternal in contrast to him who came into existence in times (χρόνοις).ἀρχὴν τὸν υἰὸν ἔθηκε τῶν γεννητῶν ὁ ἄναρχοςHe who was without beginning made the Son a beginning of all things which are produced (γεννήτῶν),καὶ ἤνεγκεν εἰς υἱον ἑαυτῷ τόνδε τεκνοποιήσας.and he made him into a Son for himself; begetting (τεκνοποιήσας) him.ἴδιον οὐδεν ἔχει τοῦ θεοῦ καθ᾽ὑπόστασιν ἰδιότητοςHe (the Son) has nothing peculiar to (ἴδιον) God according to the reality of that which is peculiarly his (καθ᾽ὑπόστασιν ἰδιότητος),οὐδὲ γάρ ἐστιν ἴσος ... ἀλλ' οὐδ' ὁμοούσιος αὐτῷ.and he is not equal ... far less is he consubstantial (ὁμοούσιος) to him (God).σοφὸς ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς, ὅτι τῆς σοφίας διδάσκαλος αύτός.And God is wise because he is the Teacher of Wisdom.ἱκανὴ δὲ ἀπόδειξις ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἀόρατος ἅπασιAs a sufficient proof that God is invisible (ἀόρατος) to all, τοῖς τε δι' υἱοῦ καὐτῷ τῷ υἱ(ῷ) ἀόρατος ὁ αὐτός...that he is invisible to the Son's people and to the Son himself...ῥητῶς δ' <ἐγὼ> λέχω πῶς τῷ υἱῷ ὁρᾶτ' ὁ ἀόρατος·I will declare roundly, how the invisible can be visible to the Son: τῇ δυνάμει ᾗ δύνατ' ὁ θεὸς ἰδεῖν ἰδίοις. . τε μέτροιςby the power in which God can see, according to his individual ... capacities (ἰδίοις ... τε μέτροις) ὑπομένει ὁ υἱὸς ἰδεῖν ... τὸν πατέρ' ὡς θέμις ἐστιν.the Son is able to see... the Father as is determined (θέμις). ἤγουν τριάς ἐστιν ... δόξαις οὐχ ὁμοίαις Certainly there is a Trinity .. and they possess glories of different levels (δόξαις οὐχ ὁμοίαις)ἀνεπίμικτοι ἑαυταῖς αἱ ὑποστάσεις αὐτῶνtheir individual realities (ὑποστάσεις) do not mix with each other,μία τῆς μιᾶς ἐνδοξοτέρα δοξαῖς ἐπ' ἄπειρον.The sole glory is of the Sole (μία τῆς μιᾶς), infinitely more splendid in his glories.ξένος τοῦ υἱοῦ κατ' οὐσίαν ὁ πατήρ ὅτι ἄναρχος ὐπάρχει.The father is in his substance (οὐσίαν) alien (ξένος) from the Son because he remains without beginning.σύνες <οὖν> ὅτι ἡ μονὰς ἦν, ἡ δυὰς δ' οὐκ ἦν πρὶν ὑπάρξῃ.Understand therefore that the Mondad (μονὰς) existed, but the Dyad (δυὰς) did not exist before it attained existence.αὐτίκα γοῦν υἱοῦ μὴ ὄντος ὁ πατὴρ θεός ἐστι.λοιπὸν ὁ υἱὸς οὐκ ὢν (ὐπῆρξε<ν> δὲ θελήσει πατρῴᾳ)So the Son having not existed attained existence by the Father's will.μονογενὴς θεός ἐστι<ν> κἀ κατέρων ἀλλότριος οὗτος.He is only-begotten God and he is different from any others.ἡ σοφία σοφία ὑπῆρξε σοφοῦ θεοῦ θελήσει.Wisdom became Wisdom by the will of the wise God,επινοεῖται γοῦν μυρίαις ὅσαις ἐπινοίαις and so he is apprehended in an uncountable number of aspects (ἐπινοίαις). πνεῦμα ... δύναμις, σοφία,δόξα θεοῦ, ἀλήθειά τε καὶ εἰκὼν καὶ λόγος οὗτος. He is God's Glory and Truth, and Image and Word.σύνες ὅτι καὶ ἀπαύγασμά <τε> καὶ φῶς ἐπινοεῖται.Understand too that he is apprehended as Reflection (ἀπαύγασμα) also and Light.ἴσον μὲν τοῦ υἱοῦ' γεννᾶν δυνατός ἐστιν ὁ κρείττωνThe Greater One is able to beget (γεννᾶν) someone equal to the Son, διαφορώτερον δ' ἢ κρείττονα ἢ μείζονα, οὐχί.but not someone more important or more powerful or greater.θεοῦ θελήσει ὁ υἱὸς ἡλίκος καὶ ὅσος ἐστὶν,It is by the will of God that the Son has his stature and character (ἡλίκος καὶ ὅσος)ἐξ ὅτε κἀφ' οὖ κἀπὸ τότ' ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ὑπέστη.when and whence and from what time he is from God.ἰσχυρὸς <γὰρ> θεὸς ὢν τὸν κρείττονα ἐκ μέρους ὑμνεῖ. For he is the Mighty God and in some degree (ἐκ μέρους) worships the Greater.συνελόντι εἰπεῖν τῷ υἱῷ ὁ θεὸς ἄρρητος ὑπάρχειTo summarize, God is mysterious (ἄρρητος) to the Son, ἔστι γὰρ ἁυτῷ ὅ ἐστι<ν>, τοῦτ' ἔστιν ἄλεκτος,for he is to him that which he is, i.e. ineffable (ἄλεκτος),ὥστ' οὐδὲν τῶν λεγομένων ... κατά τε κατάληψινso that none of the things spoken ... συνίει ἐξειπεῖν ὁ υἱός, ἀδύνατα γὰρ αὐτῷ  ... for it is impossible for himτὸν πατέρα τε ἐξιχνιάσαι ὅς ἐστιν ἐφ' αὑτοῦ·to trace out in the case of the Father what he is in himself. αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁ υἱὸς τὴν αὑτοῦ οὐσίαν οὐκ οἶδενIndeed the Son himself does not know his own substance (ousia), υἱὸς γὰρ ὢν θελήσει πατρὸς ὑπῆρξεν ἀληθῶς.for though he is the Son he is really so by the will of the Father.τίς γοῦν λόγος συγχωρεῖ τὸν ἐκ πατρὸς ὄνταFor what sense does it make that he who is from the Father αὐτὸν τὸν γεννήσαντα ... γνῶν' ἐν καταλήψει;should in comprehending his own begetter?δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι τὸ αρχὴν <τιν'> ἔχον, τὸν ἄναρχον ὅς ἐστινFor it is clear that that which has a beginning, of him who is without beginning the nature (ὡς ἔστιν) ἐμπερινοῆσ' ἢ ἐμπεριδράξασθ' οὐχ οἷόν τέ ἐστιν.could not possibly comprehend or grasp. Arius (/əˈraɪəs, ˈɛəri-/; Koinē Greek: Ἄρειος, Áreios; 250 or 256–336) was a Libyan presbyter and ascetic, and priest in Baucalis in Alexandria, Egypt. His teachings about the nature of the Godhead in Christianity, which emphasized God the Father's uniqueness and Christ's subordination under the Father, and his opposition to what would become the dominant Christology, Homoousian Christology, made him a primary topic of the First Council of Nicaea, which was convened by Emperor Constantine the Great in 325. After Emperors Licinius and Constantine legalized and formalized the Christianity of the time in the Roman Empire, Constantine sought to unify the newly recognized Church and remove theological divisions. The Christian Church was divided over disagreements on Christology, or, the nature of the relationship between Jesus and God. Homoousian Christians, including Athanasius of Alexandria, used Arius and Arianism as epithets to describe those who disagreed with their doctrine of coequal Trinitarianism, a Homoousian Christology representing God the Father and Jesus Christ the Son as 'of one essence' ('consubstantial') and coeternal. Negative writings describe Arius's theology as one in which there was a time before the Son of God, when only God the Father existed. Despite concerted opposition, Arian Christian churches persisted throughout Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa, especially in various Germanic kingdoms, until suppressed by military conquest or voluntary royal conversion between the fifth and seventh centuries. The Son's precise relationship with the Father had been discussed for decades before Arius's advent; Arius intensified the controversy and carried it to a Church-wide audience, where others like Eusebius of Nicomedia proved much more influential in the long run. In fact, some later Arians disavowed the name, claiming not to have been familiar with the man or his specific teachings. However, because the conflict between Arius and his foes brought the issue to the theological forefront, the doctrine he proclaimed—though not originated—is generally labeled as 'his'. Reconstructing the life and doctrine of Arius has proven to be a difficult task, as none of his original writings survive. Emperor Constantine ordered their burning while Arius was still living, and any that survived this purge were later destroyed by his Orthodox opponents. Those works which have survived are quoted in the works of churchmen who denounced him as a heretic. This leads some — but not all — scholars to question their reliability. Arius was of Berber descent. His father's name is given as Ammonius. Arius is believed to have been a student at the exegetical school in Antioch, where he studied under Saint Lucian. Having returned to Alexandria, Arius, according to a single source, sided with Meletius of Lycopolis in his dispute over the re-admission of those who had denied Christianity under fear of Roman torture, and was ordained a deacon under the latter's auspices. He was excommunicated by Bishop Peter of Alexandria in 311 for supporting Meletius, but under Peter's successor Achillas, Arius was re-admitted to Christian communion and in 313 made presbyter of the Baucalis district in Alexandria. Although his character has been severely assailed by his opponents, Arius appears to have been a man of personal ascetic achievement, pure morals, and decided convictions. Paraphrasing Epiphanius of Salamis, an opponent of Arius, Catholic historian Warren H. Carroll describes him as 'tall and lean, of distinguished appearance and polished address. Women doted on him, charmed by his beautiful manners, touched by his appearance of asceticism. Men were impressed by his aura of intellectual superiority.' Though Arius was also accused by his opponents of being too liberal, and too loose in his theology, engaging in heresy (as defined by his opponents), some historians argue that Arius was actually quite conservative, and that he deplored how, in his view, Christian theology was being too freely mixed with Greek paganism. Arius is notable primarily because of his role in the Arian controversy, a great fourth-century theological conflict that led to the calling of the first ecumenical council of the Church. This controversy centered upon the nature of the Son of God, and his precise relationship to God the Father. Before the council of Nicaea, the Christian world knew several competing Christological ideas. Church authorities condemned some of these ideas but did not put forth a uniform formula. The Nicaean formula was a rapidly concluded solution to the general Christological debate.