Arianism defeats Trinitarianism

gochisox

I have been wondering for a while what would change if the Arians managed to become the dominant Christian sect. If at Nicea the word "homoousios" was not used or if Constantius II and his wife were able to have children and ingrain an Arian belief system in him, or if the Goths and Vandels decided to continue in the Arian belief instead of converting to the Trinity. Would there be that big of difference, if the split continued, it would be much stronger in the east, (and Germany) then in the West, and would you see a much earlier scism.
I think the biggest chance would be the lack of "homoousios" in the Council of Nicea since that was the sticking point for most of the opposition, and a much higer rate of conversion for many of the German tribes then in OTL, besides a lack of the centralization of the Catholic Church, dont think it would affect the conversion of pagans to Christianity, it may even hasten it, (since almost every Germanic tribe converted to Arianism first and then Catholism) The Arabs would be more devastating since its power was so much stronger in the east then Catholisim was.
 
St. Just

St. Just

You'd need a PoD slightly earlier; enough to make Arianism a dominant intellectual current within at least part of the Church. This could be achieved with Arius having more supporters in more prominent positions-- a la Nestorius being Patriarch of Constantinople-- or with a more powerful figure being the main progenitor of non-Trinitarian Christianity.

If a council decides on non-Trinitarianism, you're going to have at least one area that dissents, just like how Arianism lingered in the Germanies and elsewhere for a while. I'd say the West is the best bet for that; Arius was Libyan but served in Alexandria, and the dominant parts of the church were all in the East.
 

gochisox

Yeah I had no plan to have Arianism become dominant at first, it seemed to be kinda like Unitarianism was in the 19th century, powerful with the rich but weak with the poor, but I think thats mainly due to the Nicaea and being declared heretical, and if Nicaea changes then you have much wider conversions, its not much different then the trinity and if you think about it, Arianism just makes more sense, (if Gods the Father, then obviously he made the Son) the problem i'm having looking for stuff is that besides the father son thing, what did they actually believe, it was so demonized that theres little of what they believed otherwise, so its hard to see exactly how things would change. Im trying to see about a TL but without the beliefs theres no idea of what to write, besides a stronger tie between the Germanic tribes and Constantinople and having Rome as the "heretic" instead of Constantinople.

As for the idea of having it stronger earlier, im not sure that thats even possible, Arianism spread like wildfire, Arius was first denounced in 321 and the Council of Nicea was in 325, for a controversy to become so great in the span of four years that the Emporor orders the first Counsel ever is crazy. the closest I can think of to strengthening the Arian hand is to have Bishop Alexander of Alexandria come instead of Athanasius, who basically lead the charge against Arianism and without him, its statement against Arianism most likely would have still passed but could have been weaker, which could have dramatic affects.

If anyone has more info on the specific beliefs on Arianism, it would be appreciated
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top