SUPPORT THE WORK

GetWiki

Arian controversy

ARTICLE SUBJECTS
aesthetics  →
being  →
complexity  →
database  →
enterprise  →
ethics  →
fiction  →
history  →
internet  →
knowledge  →
language  →
licensing  →
linux  →
logic  →
method  →
news  →
perception  →
philosophy  →
policy  →
purpose  →
religion  →
science  →
sociology  →
software  →
truth  →
unix  →
wiki  →
ARTICLE TYPES
essay  →
feed  →
help  →
system  →
wiki  →
ARTICLE ORIGINS
critical  →
discussion  →
forked  →
imported  →
original  →
Arian controversy
[ temporary import ]
please note:
- the content below is remote from Wikipedia
- it has been imported raw for GetWiki
{{Arianism}}The Arian controversy was a series of Christian theological disputes that arose between Arius and Athanasius of Alexandria, two Christian theologians from Alexandria, Egypt. The most important of these controversies concerned the substantial relationship between God the Father and God the Son.The deep divisions created by the disputes were an ironic consequence of Emperor Constantine's efforts to unite Christianity and establish a single, imperially approved version of the faith during his reign.BOOK, Papandrea, James Leonard, Reading the Early Church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea,weblink 177, BOOK, Smither, Edward L., Rethinking Constantine: History, Theology, and Legacy,weblink 65-66, These disagreements divided the Church into two opposing theological 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 resolution or formal schism, though the Trinitarian faction ultimately gained the upper hand in the imperial Church; outside the Roman Empire this faction was not immediately so influential. Arianism continued to be preached inside and outside the Empire for some time (without the blessing of the Empire) but eventually it was killed off. The modern Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, as well as most other modern Christian sects have generally followed the Trinitarian formulation, though each has its own specific theology on the matter.BOOK, Dunner, Joseph, Handbook of world history: concepts and issues, 1967, 70, BOOK, Campbell, Ted, Christian Confessions: A Historical Introduction, 1996,weblink 41,

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: 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".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.BOOK,weblink Life of Constantine, Eusebius, of Caesarea, Bishop of Caesarea, approximately 260-approximately 340., 1999, Clarendon Press, Cameron, Averil., Hall, Stuart George., 1423767667, Oxford, 67703212, Because the controversy continued to spread, in 325 Emperor Constantine held the first Council of Nicaea with an agenda to prosecute Arius.BOOK,weblink Archetypal heresy : Arianism through the centuries, Wiles, Maurice, 1923-2005., 1996, Clarendon Press, 9780191520594, Oxford, 344023364, {{Further|Synods of Antioch}}

First Council of Nicea (325)

File:Nikea-arius.png|left|thumb|The First Council of Nicaea, with Arius depicted beneath the feet of emperor Constantine the Great and the bishopbishopArianism would not be contained within the Alexandrian diocese. By the time Bishop Alexander finally acted against his recalcitrant 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. The emperor had taken a personal interest in several ecumenical issues, including the Donatist controversy in 316, and he 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 composed of church prelates from all parts of the empire to resolve this issue, possibly at Hosius' recommendation.BOOK, Vasiliev, Al, History of the Byzantine Empire, 1928,weblink 2 May 2012, The empire from Constantine the Great to Justinian, All secular dioceses of the empire sent one or more representatives to the council, save for Roman Britain;{{citation needed|date=February 2016}} the majority of the bishops came from the East. Pope Sylvester I, himself too aged to attend, sent two priests as his delegates. Arius himself attended the council, but his bishop, Alexander, did not, but instead, he sent his young deacon, Athanasius in place of him. Athanasius would become the champion of the Trinitarian viewpoint ultimately adopted by the council and spend most of his life battling Arianism. 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.BOOK, Photius, Epitome of Book I,weblink Photios I of Constantinople, 2 May 2012, Epitome of Chapter VII, The council would be 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 God the Son 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,JOURNAL, Babylon the Great Has Fallen, God's Kingdom Rules!, 1963, 447, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., 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."BOOK, M'Clintock, John, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, James Strong, 45, 7, According to some accounts{{who|date=December 2013}} 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 "one in essence", which was incompatible with Arius' beliefs.BOOK, Carroll, A, History of Christendom, Volume II, 12, 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.{{citation needed|date=December 2013}}

Ariminum, Seleucia, and Constantinople (358-360)

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.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 10.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 37.In 359, the western council met at Ariminum. Ursacius of Singidunum and Valens of Mursa declared that the Son was like the father "according to the scriptures," following a new (Homoian) creed drafted at Sirmium (359). 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. After the council, Pope Liberius condemned the creed of Ariminum, while his rival, Pope Felix II, supported it.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 40.An earthquake struck Nicomedia, killing the bishop Cecropius of 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. Basil of Ancyra and his party declared that the Son was of similar substance to the Father, following a (Homoiousian) Creed of Antioch from 341, and deposed the opposing party. Acacius of Caesarea declared that the Son was like the Father, introducing a new (Homoian) creed.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 11. The Son was begotten - generated from God's own substance.Constantius requested a third council, at Constantinople (359), 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, Eustathius of Sebaste, and their party again declared that the Son was of similar substance to the Father, as in the majority decision at Seleucia. Maris of Chalcedon, Eudoxius of Antioch, and the deacons Aëtius of Antioch and Eunomius of Cyzicus declared that the Son was of a dissimilar substance from the Father.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 12 and book 5, chapter 1.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 41. The Heteroousians defeated the Homoiousians in an initial debate, but Constantius banished Aëtius, after which the council, including Maris and Eudoxius, agreed to the homoian creed of Ariminum with minor modifications.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.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 5, chapter 1.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 42. 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.Henry Chadwick, History of the Early Church, chapter 9 According to Philostorgius, pagans killed George of Laodicea, bishop of Alexandria, allowing Athanasius to reclaim the see.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 7, chapter 2.

Sides

{{Expand section|date=June 2008}}

Homoousian

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 whom|date=February 2017}}. The Athanasian form would be declared orthodox at the Council of Constantinople in 383, and has become the basis of most of modern trinitarianism.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.
  • Alexander, bishop of Alexandria (313-326).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 5 & 6.
  • Hosius, bishop of Cordoba (?-359).Socrates of Constantintinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 7 and book 2, chapter 31.
  • Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea (c. 313-339).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 21.
  • Eustathius, (possibly Sabellian) bishop of Antioch (c. 325-330).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 25.
  • Cyrus, (possibly Sabellian) bishop of Beroe.
  • Athanasius (Athanasian) bishop of Alexandria (326-373, later rival of Gregory of Cappadocia and then George of Laodicea).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 23, 27-32 & 34-35.
  • Paul, bishop of Constantinople (336-351, later rival of Eusebius of Nicomedia and then Macedonius I of Constantinople).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 6-7, 12 & 16.
  • Julius, bishop of Rome (337-352).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 15.
  • Asclepas, bishop of Gaza.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 23.
  • Lucius, bishop of Adrianople (?-351).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 23 & 26.
  • Maximus, bishop of Jerusalem (333-350).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 24 & 38.
  • Paulinus, bishop of Treves, who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 36.
  • Dionysius, bishop of Alba, who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.
  • Eusebius, bishop of Vercelli (340-371), who supported Athanasius of Alexandria at Milan.
  • Angelius, (Novatian) bishop of Constantinople.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 38.
  • Gregory of Nazianzus{{Citation needed|date=July 2007}}
  • Gregory of Elvira{{Citation needed|date=July 2007}}
  • Lucifer, bishop of Cagliari.{{Citation needed|date=July 2007}}
  • Hilary, bishop of Poitiers (c. 353-367).{{Citation needed|date=July 2007}}
  • Servatius, bishop of Tongeren.{{Citation needed|date=July 2007}}

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."Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 36 and book 2, chapter 20Socrates, 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." 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.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.'
  • Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra (?-336 and c. 343-c. 374) and critic of Asterius.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 36 and book 2, chapter 20.
  • Photinus, bishop of Sirmium (?-351) and in exile (351-376); according to Socrates of Constantinople and Sozomen, Photinus was a follower of Marcellus.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 18 & 29.Sozomen, Church History, book 4, chapter 6.
  • In 336, a church trial at Constantinople deposed Marcellus and condemned his doctrines.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 36.Sozomen, Church History, book 2, chapter 33.
  • 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.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 20.Sozomen, Church History, book 3, chapters 11-12.
  • Under pressure from his co-Emperor Constans, Constantius II initially backed the decision of Sardica, but after Constans' death, reversed course.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 23 & 26.Sozomen, Church Hustory, book 4, chapter 2.
  • In 351,{{Citation needed|date=August 2007}} a church trial at the Council of Sirmium deposed Photinus and condemned his teachings.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 29-30.Sozomen, Church History, book 4, chapter 6.
  • The Macrostich condemned the teachings of Marcellus and Photinus.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 19.

Homoiousian

The Homoiousian school taught that the Son is of a similar substance to the Father but not the same.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 9.Peter Heather & John Matthews, Goths in the Fourth Century, p. 128. This mainly discusses the later controversy.
  • Basil of Ancyra, bishop of Ancyra (336-360).Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 8, chapter 17.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 36 & book 2, chapter 42.
  • Macedonius, (Macedonian) bishop of Constantinople (342-346 and 351-360).Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 9 & book 8, chapter 17.Socrates if Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 16, 27, 38 & 42.
  • George of Laodicea, bishop of Alexandria (356-361, rival of Athanasius of Alexandria).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 24 & 40.
  • Eudoxius, bishop of Germanicia (?-358), Antioch (358-359), and Constantinople (360-370), who supported the Macrostich.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapters 4 & 12.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 19, 37 & 40.
  • Martyrius, who supported the Macrostich.
  • Macedonius, bishop of Mopsuestia, who supported the Macrostich.
  • Mark, bishop of Arethusa, who wrote the Creed of Sirmium of 351.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 30.
  • Cyril, (Macedonian) bishop of Jerusalem (350-386).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 38 & 42.
  • Marathonius, (Macedonian) bishop of Nicomedia (c. 351-?).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 38 & 45.
  • Eleusius, (Macedonian) bishop of Cyzicus (c. 351-360).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 38, 42 & 45.
  • Sophronius, (Macedonian) bishop of Pompeiopolis (?-360).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 39, 40, 42 & 45.
  • Dracontius, bishop of Pergamum (?-360).
  • Neonas, bishop of Seleucia Isauria (?-360).
  • Elpidius, bishop of Satala (?-360).
  • Eustathius, (Macedonian) bishop of Sebastia.Socrates of Connstantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 45.
  • Annianus of Antioch.
  • Sabinus, Macedonian bishop of Heraclea.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 8 and book 2, chapter 15.

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.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 3 for Hosius and chapter 8 for Aëtius.
  • Ursacius, initially homoiousian, then homoousian, and later homoian bishop of Singidunum, who had opposed Athanasius.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 27 and book 2, chapters 12 & 37.
  • Valens, initially homoiousian, then homoousian, and later homoian bishop of Mursa, who had opposed Athanasius.
  • Germinius.
  • Auxentius (died 374), bishop of Milan.
  • Demophilus, bishop of Beraea (?-370) and Constantinople (370-380).Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 9, chapter 19.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 37.
  • Gaius.
  • Acacius, bishop of Caesarea (340-366).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 4, 39 & 40.

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.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."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.
  • Arius, presbyter in Alexandria.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 5-6.
  • Theophilus the Indian, who later supported Aëtius.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 3, chapter 5 and book 8, chapter 2.
  • Aëtius, who founded the Anomoean tradition, later bishop (361-?).Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 7, chapter 6.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 35.
  • Theodulus, (Anomoean) bishop of Chaeretapa (?-c. 363) and Palestine (c. 363-c. 379).Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 8, chapter 2 and book 9, chapter 18.
  • Eunomius, (Anomoean) bishop of Cyzicus (360-361) and exiled bishop (361-c. 393).Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 5, chapter 3 and book 6, chapters 1-3.
  • Paemenius, (Anomoean) bishop of Constantinople, (c. 363, at the same time as Eudoxius of Antioch).Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 8, chapter 2.
  • Candidus, (Anomoean) bishop of Lydia, (c. 363-?).
  • Arrianus, (Anomoean) bishop of Ionia, (c. 363-?).
  • Florentius, (Anomoean) bishop of Constantinople, (c. 363-?, at the same time as Eudoxius of Antioch).
  • Thallus, (Anomoean) bishop of Lesbos, (c. 363-?, at the same time as Eudoxius of Antioch).
  • Euphronius, (Anomoean) bishop of Galatia, the Black Sea and Cappadocia, (c. 363-?).
  • Julian, (Anomoean) bishop of Cilicia, (c. 363-?).
  • Serras, Stephen, and Heliodorus, (Anomoean) bishops of Egypt, (c. 363-?).
  • Philostorgius, (Anomoean) historian.

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.
  • Secundus, bishop of Ptolemais, who supported Arius at Nicaea.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 8.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 1, chapter 9.Condemned by Alexander of Alexandria, see Socrates, Church History, book 1, chapter 6.
  • Theonus, bishop of Marmarica, who supported Arius at Nicaea.
  • Eusebius, bishop of Berytus, Nicomedia (?-325 and 328-338) and Constantinople (338-341, rival of Paul I of Constantinople), who supported Arius at Nicaea.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 6, 8 & 14, and book 2, chapter 7.
  • Theognis, bishop of Nicaea, who supported Arius at Nicaea.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapters 6, 8 & 14.
  • Maris, bishop of Chalcedon, who supported Arius at Nicaea.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 1, chapter 9 and book 4, chapter 12.
  • Eusebius, (possibly Homoiousian, possibly Sabellian) bishop of Emesa (c. 339 or 341).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 9.
  • Gregory of Cappadocia, bishop of Alexandria (339-346, rival of Athanasius of Alexandria).Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 10-11.
  • Narcissus, bishop of Neronias.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 26.
  • Stephanus, bishop of Antioch (342-344).
  • Leontius, bishop of Antioch (344-358), who also taught Aetius.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 3, chapter 17.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 26 & 35.
  • Patrophilus of Scythopolis.
  • Asterius (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.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 1, chapter 36.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 4.
  • Athanasius of Anazarbus, who taught Aetius.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 3, chapter 15.
  • Wulfila (died 383), first bishop of the Goths (341?-c.383), and Bible translator, who agreed to the Homoian formula at Constantinople.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 2, chapter 5.
  • Wereka and Batwin, papa and bilaifs respectively, and Gothic martyrs.
  • Auxentius of Durostorum, later bishop of Milan, Wulfila's adopted son.Heather and Matthews, Goths in the Fourth Century, pp. 135-136.
  • Palladius, bishop of Ratiaria.
  • Secundianus, bishop of Singidunum.

Unclassified

  • Euzoius, deacon and supporter of Arius; later Homoian bishop of Antioch (361-378, at the same time as three others).Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 5, chapter 5, book 8, chapter 2 and book 9, chapter 4.
  • Dorotheus or Theodorus, Homoiousian and later Homoian bishop of Heraclea (?-378) and Antioch, (378-381, at the same time as three others).Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 8, chapter 17 and book 9, chapter 14.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 12.
  • Uranius, bishop of Tyre.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapters 39 & 40.
  • Onesimus, bishop of Nicomedia (359-?).
  • Athanasius, bishop of Ancyra (359-?, at the same time as Basil of Ancyra).
  • Acacius, bishop of Tarsus (359-?, at the same time as Silvanus of Tarsus).
  • Silvanus, bishop of Tarsus.Socrates of Constantinople, Church History, book 2, chapter 39.
  • Hypatius of Cyrus, bishop of Nicaea (?-380).
  • Leontius, bishop of Tripolis.
  • Theodosius, a bishop of Philadelphia in Lydia.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 8, chapter 3.
  • John, Anomean bishop of Palestine (c. 379-?).Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 9, chapter 18.
  • Evagrius, bishop of Mytelene.
  • Asterius, presbyter in Antioch, possibly the same as an Asterius who supported Acacius at Seleucia.Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 10, chapter 1.

See also

References

{{Reflist|30em}}

External links

  1. The Arians Of The Fourth Century by John Henry Cardinal Newman
    • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20130303133427weblink">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.
      • 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.
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715082329weblink">SECTION 1.—The Church of Antioch
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111438weblink">SECTION II.—The Schools of the Sophists
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20110918064511weblink">SECTION III.—The Church of Alexandria
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111443weblink">SECTION IV.—The Eclectic Sect
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111331weblink">SECTION V.—Sabellianism
        • Chapter II.—The Teaching Of The Ante-Nicene Church In Its Relation To The Arian Heresy.
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20110915064432weblink">SECTION I.—On the principle of the formation and imposition of Creeds
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111341weblink">SECTION II.—The Scripture doctrine of the Trinity
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111346weblink">SECTION III.—The Ecclesiastical doctrine of the Trinity
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111448weblink">SECTION IV.—Variations in the Ante-Nicene Theological Statements
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111351weblink">SECTION V.— The Arian Heresy
      • PART II. Historical
        • Chapter III.—The Ecumenical Council Of Nicea In The Reign Constantine.
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111453weblink">SECTION I.—History of the Nicene Council
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111356weblink">SECTION II.—Consequences of the Nicene Council
        • Chapter IV—Councils In The Reign Of Constantius.
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111401weblink">SECTION I.—The Eusebians
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111458weblink">SECTION II.—The Semi-Arians (Note: The top-level page of this document mis-labels this section as "The Athanasians.)
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111407weblink">SECTION III.- The Athanasians
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111412weblink">SECTION IV.—The Anomoeans
        • Chapter V.—Councils After The Reign Of Constantius.
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111417weblink">SECTION I.—The Question Of The Hyhpostasis
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20100715111503weblink">SECTION II.—The Question Of The Arianizers
        • CHAPTER VI.—The Councils Of Constantinple
          • weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20110918120737weblink">The Ecumenical Council of Constantinople in the reign of Theodosius
    • 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 [the author], form an Appendix."
      • "The Table of Contents, and the Chronological Table have both been enlarged."
  2. A Chronology of the Arian Controversy
    • Archive: weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20160811130741weblink">A Chronology of the Arian controversy
  3. Documents of the Early Arian Controversy
    • Archive: weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20160805200612weblink">Documents of the early Arian controversy
{{History of the Catholic Church}}{{History of Christianity}}

- content above as imported from Wikipedia
- "Arian controversy" does not exist on GetWiki (yet)
- time: 12:12am EDT - Sun, May 26 2019
[ this remote article is provided by Wikipedia ]
LATEST EDITS [ see all ]
GETWIKI 09 MAY 2016
GETWIKI 18 OCT 2015
M.R.M. Parrott
Biographies
GETWIKI 20 AUG 2014
GETWIKI 19 AUG 2014
GETWIKI 18 AUG 2014
Wikinfo
Culture
CONNECT