494 Early Church History 12: Arius and Alexander of Alexandria
May 6, 2023
auto_awesome
Arius, a presbyter deeply embroiled in fourth-century Christological debates, contrasts sharply with his authoritative bishop, Alexander of Alexandria. The discussion highlights the fascinating theological tensions between their views on the nature of Christ, exploring Arius's perspective of a created Son versus Alexander's belief in eternal divinity. Emperor Constantine’s efforts to mediate these disputes are revealed, shedding light on the early church's evolving relationship with state power and setting the stage for future doctrinal conflicts.
The conflict between Bishop Alexander and presbyter Arius marked the beginning of significant Christological controversies in the fourth century regarding the nature of the Son's existence.
Emperor Constantine's intervention aimed to unify the church leaders, but his efforts ultimately failed to resolve the underlying doctrinal divisions.
Deep dives
The Conflict Between Alexander and Arius
The early stages of the Christological controversies in the fourth century centered around the conflict between Bishop Alexander of Alexandria and presbyter Arius. Alexander, who held the bishopric from 313 to 326, attempted to assert his authority over Christian doctrine, specifically concerning the nature of the relationship between the Father and the Son. His opposition to Arius began in 318 when Arius challenged Alexander's teachings about the Son's eternal existence, arguing instead that there was a time when the Son did not exist. This disagreement set the groundwork for a prolonged theological conflict that would continue in various forms for many years.
Arius's Theological Position
Arius, an ascetic scholar respected for his logical arguments, positioned himself against Alexander by stating that if the Son was begotten, it logically followed that there was a time when He was not. His assertion that the Son derived His existence from the Father was a revolutionary claim during a period when theological ideas were being hotly debated. Arius insisted on the belief that the Father alone was unbegotten and eternal, effectively putting the Son in a subordinate position. His views were significant enough to be considered orthodox by many early bishops and clergy, leading to a schism within the church.
Council of Bishops and Excommunication
The ecclesiastical disputes escalated when Alexander convened a council of bishops to address the growing tension. He insisted that Arius reject his teachings and sign a confession affirming the eternal nature of the Son, a demand which Arius outright refused. Following his refusal, Alexander excommunicated Arius from the church, along with a significant number of supporters who left with him in protest. This schism highlighted the deepening divide within early Christianity regarding the understanding of the Trinity and set off a series of letters and appeals between bishops as they sought to navigate their theological disagreements.
Constantine's Attempt at Reconciliation
Emperor Constantine became involved in the controversy, perceiving the divisions among the church leaders as detrimental to the unity of the Christian community. He urged both Alexander and Arius to resolve their differences peacefully, deeming their disputes minor and unworthy of the fierce contention they had generated. Despite his efforts and suggestions for mutual forgiveness, the theological rift only widened, leading to further councils and debates across the empire. Constantine's attempts to mediate the situation reflected his broader goal of stabilizing Christianity within the Roman Empire, but ultimately, the underlying doctrinal issues continued to fuel conflict.
Today we begin a two part series on the Christological controversies of the fourth century. Our focus for this episode is the conflict between Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, and his presbyter, Arius. You may be surprised to learn that Arius was not some youthful outsider spouting off obvious heresy. Rather than depending on what modern historians and biased apologists say, we'll depend on ancient historians and the surviving letters from Arius, Alexander, and Constantine to reconstruct what really happened. You may be surprised what we find.