Program / Course 9: Christology and Pneumatology / Lesson 2.2
What you will learn
- Explain the core claim of Arius and the Nicene reply summed up in the word homoousios.
- Describe the proposal of Apollinarius about the human mind of Christ and why it was rejected.
- State the argument that what was not taken on by the Son was not saved.
- Describe the biblical texts and philosophical concerns that motivated each man.
The big idea
In the fourth century two proposals pressed the question of who Christ is from two sides. Arius, a priest of Alexandria, taught that the Son was the first and greatest of God’s creatures, made before time, but not eternal and not of the same being as the Father. Apollinarius, a bishop who strongly opposed Arius, taught that the Word took a human body and soul but supplied the place of the human mind himself. The church rejected the first at Nicaea in 325 and the second at Constantinople in 381, each time because of what it would do to the faith.
Key terms
- Arianism
- The teaching associated with Arius that the Son is a creature, made by the Father before time, and not of the same being as the Father.
- Homoousios
- A Greek word meaning of the same being or substance. Nicaea used it to say the Son is of one being with the Father.
- Begotten, not made
- A phrase in the Nicene Creed. It says that the Son comes from the Father’s being, as a son from a father, and is not a created thing.
- Apollinarianism
- The teaching of Apollinarius of Laodicea that in Christ the divine Word took the place of the human rational mind.
- Nous
- A Greek word for mind or intellect, the thinking and deciding part of a person.
- Logos
- Greek for Word. The title for the Son in John 1.
- Ecumenical council
- A gathering of bishops from the whole church whose decisions on faith are received as binding by those who accept it. The first was Nicaea in 325.
Background
Around 318 in Alexandria, the priest Arius and his bishop Alexander quarrelled over how the Son is related to the Father. The dispute spread across the Roman empire. In 325 the emperor Constantine called the bishops to Nicaea, in what is now Turkey, to settle it. The council condemned Arius and produced a creed. The conflict then continued for decades, with supporters and opponents of Nicaea winning and losing imperial favor.
The question looks abstract but concerned worship and salvation. If the Son is a creature, then Christians were worshipping a creature, and a creature could not unite people to God. If the Son is God, then the one God is somehow more than one. Apollinarius, later in the century, wanted to guard the unity of Christ while holding the Nicene view, and his answer raised its own problem.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: What Arius taught
Arius began with the oneness of God. Only the Father is unbegotten, without beginning. Anything that comes from the Father must therefore have a beginning. The Son was brought into being by the Father’s will before all ages, and so is like the Father and above all other creatures, but he is not eternal. A saying credited to Arius, reported by his opponents, was that “there was when he was not.”
His case rested on texts such as Proverbs 8:22, which in the Greek version says the Lord “created me” as the beginning of his ways, Colossians 1:15 (“firstborn of every creature”), and John 14:28 (“my Father is greater than I”). Most of what survives of his own words is in a few letters and fragments, and much of what is known comes from his opponents.
Step 2: Why the church rejected it
Athanasius, a deacon and later bishop of Alexandria, became the chief defender of the Nicene view. His argument was partly about worship and partly about salvation. Christians pray to Christ and are baptized in his name. If he is a creature, that is idolatry. And only God, he held, can bring people into life with God.
The council added the word homoousios. Nicaea’s creed says the Son is “begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father.” The word does not appear in Scripture, which troubled some bishops. It was chosen because words like “like the Father” could be accepted by Arius’s side. The creed was later restated at Constantinople in 381, and that is the form usually recited in churches.
Step 3: The aftermath and the people in the middle
Many bishops after Nicaea were neither Arius’s followers nor ready for homoousios. They preferred formulas such as “like in substance” or simply “like.” Historians call the long conflict the Arian controversy but caution that the parties were more varied than that name implies. The argument was settled in the East at Constantinople in 381, after the work of the Cappadocian Fathers.
Teachers who accepted Nicaea in substance still disagreed about words, and some uses of terms like substance and person had to be worked out. That work belongs to the doctrine of the Trinity and is taken up in Course 5.
Step 4: What Apollinarius taught
Apollinarius, bishop of Laodicea in Syria, firmly defended Nicaea and was a friend of Athanasius. He asked how Christ could be one person if there were a complete human mind alongside the divine Word. Two minds, he worried, would mean two persons. So he proposed that in Christ the Word took the place of the human mind (nous). Christ had a human body and a human life-soul, but his thinking and willing were those of the Word.
This seemed to protect the unity of Christ and his sinlessness, since in Apollinarius’s anthropology the mind was where sin and change arise. But it meant that Christ lacked something every human being has.
Step 5: Why Apollinarianism was rejected
Gregory of Nazianzus gave the central reply: “what has not been assumed has not been healed.” If the Son did not take on a human mind, then the mind of humanity was not redeemed. The Gospels also show Jesus growing in wisdom, being troubled and praying, which seem to require a human mind.
The teaching was condemned by local councils and then by the Council of Constantinople in 381. Apollinarius’s concern for unity remained, and the matter of how one person has a full human nature became the main question of the fifth century. Some scholars add that Arian teaching, as its opponents reported it, also had the Word take the place of a human soul, though this is debated.
- Why did Arius believe that the Son must have had a beginning?
- Why did Nicaea use a word that is not found in Scripture?
- What is the connection between the worship of Christ and the argument against Arius?
- Why did Apollinarius think a human mind in Christ would break his unity?
- What does it mean that what is not assumed is not healed?
- How does the debate with Arius shape the debate with Apollinarius?
Examples
Singing to the Son
Early Christians sang hymns to Christ as to God. Athanasius pointed out that Arius’s view would make this worship wrong, while Arius’s side replied that the Son deserves honor as the highest creature. The dispute shows how worship and doctrine were tied.
The Nicene anathemas
The original creed of 325 ended by condemning anyone who says the Son was made from nothing or that there was a time when he was not. These lines are no longer part of the creed that is usually recited, but they show what the bishops were responding to.
A constructed comparison
A student compares the problem to a pilot: if the pilot replaces the plane’s brain, the plane is a pilot in a machine. If a human mind is fully present, the pilot analogy fails the other way. Analogies like this show why both Arius and Apollinarius were tempting. (A constructed illustration.)
Different perspectives
Catholic
Catholic teaching holds that Nicaea and Constantinople defined the faith: the Son is consubstantial with the Father, and Christ has a complete human nature including a rational soul. Both Arianism and Apollinarianism are rejected.
Orthodox
Orthodox theology gives Nicaea and Constantinople I a central place and honors Athanasius and the Cappadocians as champions of the faith. The principle that what is not assumed is not healed is a favorite summary of Orthodox thinking on salvation.
Protestant
Protestant churches in the main traditions accept the Nicene Creed. Some groups outside that mainstream, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, hold views close to Arius, while Unitarian traditions reject the pre-existence in the Nicene form.
Historians
Historians today stress that the Arian controversy was politically and theologically complicated. Many would no longer describe a simple contest between a heretic and a hero, though most agree that Nicaea’s outcome was durable. Debate continues about how far Arius’s teaching was the product of Platonism, of Scripture, or both.
Why it matters
These two controversies are the foundation of the rest of the course. The first fixed that the Son is God. The second asked what follows for his human nature. Every later council works in the space they define.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: Constantine invented the divinity of Christ at Nicaea.
Correction: Constantine called the council and wanted unity, but the bishops decided the question of the creed. The divinity of the Son was already a common conviction in the church, and the dispute concerned how to state it against Arius. Historians do not support the claim that the emperor made the doctrine.
Misunderstanding: Arius denied that Jesus was important.
Correction: Arius gave the Son very high honor, as the creator of the world under the Father and as savior. His point was that the Son was not eternal and not of the Father’s being, which is why his teaching was rejected.
Misunderstanding: Apollinarius was against Nicaea.
Correction: He strongly supported it. His mistake, as the church judged, came from trying to protect the unity of Christ and the Son’s full divinity at the cost of the human mind.
Knowledge check
State the main teaching of Arius and one text he used.
Arius taught that the Son was created by the Father before time, is the highest creature and is not eternal. He used texts such as Proverbs 8:22 in the Greek version, Colossians 1:15 and John 14:28. The Nicene reply was that the Son is begotten, not made, and of one being with the Father.
What does homoousios mean, and why was it chosen?
It means of the same being or substance. The bishops chose it because other phrases, such as like the Father, could be accepted by Arius’s side. The word is not in Scripture, which concerned some, but supporters argued it expressed what Scripture already said about the Son.
What did Apollinarius teach about the mind of Christ?
He taught that Christ had a human body and a life-soul, but that the divine Word took the place of the human mind. His aim was to protect the unity of Christ. The church replied that this left Christ less than fully human and so failed to heal the whole human person.
What is the principle that what is not assumed is not healed?
It is an argument from Gregory of Nazianzus. If the Son did not take on some part of human nature, such as the mind, then that part was not saved by him. It links the question of who Christ is directly to the question of how he saves.
Think it through
- Which arguments of Arius seem most reasonable on a first reading?
- Why might a movement to protect Christ’s unity end up threatening his humanity?
- How much should worship practice count as evidence in a doctrinal dispute?
- What does the use of a non-biblical word at Nicaea suggest about how doctrine develops?
Independent assignment
Two proposals and two replies
In your own notebook, write 500 to 700 words. Summarize Arius’s position as he might have stated it, using three texts. Then summarize the Nicene reply. Do the same for Apollinarius and the reply of Gregory of Nazianzus. End with a short paragraph on how the second question grew from the first. Do not send this to anyone.
Further study
- Council of Nicaea (325) and Council of Constantinople (381), The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed Compare the creed of 325 with the creed of 381, if both are included.
- Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, eds., The Seven Ecumenical Councils (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 2, vol. 14) Read the documents of Nicaea and Constantinople.
- Athanasius of Alexandria, On the Incarnation of the Word Read for his argument that only God could restore humanity.
- J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines Read selectively on Arianism and Apollinarianism.
- Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity Use it for the historical background of Nicaea.
- Proverbs 8:22 The text Arius used.
- Colossians 1:15 Firstborn of every creature.
- John 14:28 My Father is greater than I.