One of the most extensive resources on the internet 
for the study of early Christianity
“Sozomen on Arius and the start of the Arian controversy”
from Historia Ecclesiastica, 1.15 - Greek Text with English translation
| 
 This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more about our use of cookies here. Click here to read at earlychurchtexts.com in the original Greek (with dictionary lookup links). The English translation below is from the NPNF series. earlychurchtexts.com 
  
      Try out the feature 
      rich subscription version of the Early Church Texts website for just $5 
      for a trial period or $30 for a year ($15 student rate). Click
      
      here for more information. Check out the video demo of the site. Click here to go to the Early Church Texts Home Page 
    for the publicly available version of the site which has just the original Greek and Latin texts with dictionary lookup links.   | 
    
| 
     
 Relevant 
    books Rowan Williams ----- R.P.C. Hanson ----- Lewis Ayres 
  | 
 Although, as we have shown, religion was in a 
flourishing condition at this period, yet the churches were disturbed by sore 
contentions; for under the pretext of piety and of seeking the more perfect 
discovery of God, certain questions were agitated, which had not, till then, 
been examined. Arius was the originator of these disputations. He was a 
presbyter of the church at Alexandria in Egypt, and was at first a zealous 
thinker about doctrine, and upheld the innovations of Melitius. Eventually, 
however, he abandoned this latter opinion, and was ordained deacon by Peter, 
bishop of Alexandria, who afterwards cast him out of the church, because when 
Peter anathematized the zealots of Melitius and rejected their baptism, Arius 
assailed him for these acts and could not be restrained in quietness. After the 
martyrdom of Peter, Arius asked forgiveness of Achillas, and was restored to his 
office as deacon, and afterwards elevated to the presbytery. Afterwards 
Alexander, also, held him in high repute, since he was a most expert logician; 
for it was said that he was not lacking in such knowledge. He fell into absurd 
discourses, so that he had the audacity to preach in the church what no one 
before him had ever suggested; namely, that the Son of God was made out of that 
which had no prior existence, that there was a period of time in which he 
existed not; that, as possessing free will, he was capable of vice and virtue, 
and that he was created and made: to these, many other similar assertions were 
added as he went forward into the arguments and the details of inquiry. Those 
who heard these doctrines advanced, blamed Alexander for not opposing the 
innovations at variance with doctrine. But this bishop deemed it more advisable 
to leave each party to the free discussion of doubtful topics, so that by 
persuasion rather than by force, they might cease from contention; hence he sat 
down as a judge with some of his clergy, and led both sides into a discussion. 
But it happened on this occasion, as is generally the case in a strife of words, 
that each party claimed the victory. Arius defended his assertions, but the 
others contended that the Son is consubstantial and co-eternal with the Father. 
The council was convened a second time, and the same points contested, but they 
came to no agreement amongst themselves. During the debate, Alexander seemed to 
incline first to one party and then to the other; finally, however, he declared 
himself in favor of those who affirmed that the Son was consubstantial and 
co-eternal with the Father, and he commanded Arius to receive this doctrine, and 
to reject his former opinions. Arius, however, would not be persuaded to 
compliance, and many of the bishops and clergy considered his statement of 
doctrine to be correct. Alexander, therefore, ejected him and the clergy who 
concurred with him in sentiment from the church. Those of the parish of 
Alexandria, who had embraced his opinions, were the presbyters Aithalas, 
Achillas, Carpones, Sarmates, and Arius, and the deacons Euzoïus, Macarius, 
Julius, Menas, and Helladius. Many of the people, likewise, sided with them: 
some, because they imagined their doctrines to be of God; others, as frequently 
happens in similar cases, because they believed them to have been ill-treated 
and unjustly excommunicated. Such being the state of affairs at Alexandria, the 
partisans of Arius, deeming it prudent to seek the favor of the bishops of other 
cities, sent legations to them; they sent a written statement of their doctrines 
to them, requesting them that, if they considered such sentiments to be of God, 
they would signify to Alexander that he ought not to molest them; but that if 
they disapproved of the doctrines, they should teach them what opinions were 
necessary to be held. This precaution was of no little advantage to them; for 
their tenets became thus universally disseminated, and the questions they had 
started became matters of debate among all the bishops. Some wrote to Alexander, 
entreating him not to receive the partisans of Arius into communion unless they 
repudiated their opinions, while others wrote to urge a contrary line of 
conduct. When Alexander perceived that many who were revered by the appearance 
of good conduct, and weighty by the persuasiveness of eloquence, held with the 
party of Arius, and particularly Eusebius, president of the church of Nicomedia, 
a man of considerable learning and held in high repute at the palace; he wrote 
to the bishops of every church desiring them not to hold communion with them. 
This measure kindled the zeal of each party the more, and as might have been 
expected, the contest was increasingly agitated. Eusebius and his partisans had 
often petitioned Alexander, but could not persuade him; so that considering 
themselves insulted, they became indignant and came to a stronger determination 
to support the doctrine of Arius. A synod having been convened in Bithynia, they 
wrote to all the bishops, desiring them to hold communion with the Arians, as 
with those making a true confession, and to require Alexander to hold communion 
with them likewise. As compliance could not be extorted from Alexander, Arius 
sent messengers to Paulinas, bishop of Tyre, to Eusebius Pamphilus, who presided 
over the church of Cæsarea in Palestine, and to Patrophilus, bishop of 
Scythopolis, soliciting permission for himself and for his adherents, as they 
had previously attained the rank of presbyters, to form the people who were with 
them into a church. For it was the custom in Alexandria, as it still is in the 
present day, that all the churches should be under one bishop, but that each 
presbyter should have his own church, in which to assemble the people. These 
three bishops, in concurrence with others who were assembled in Palestine, 
granted the petition of Arius, and permitted him to assemble the people as 
before; but enjoined submission to Alexander, and commanded Arius to strive 
incessantly to be restored to peace and communion with him.  | 
    
  
Mac Users please note that the site may not work with Safari versions lower than version 4. (It has been tested with version 4.0.3.) It will work with Firefox, which can be downloaded from here.
Please note that for all features of the site to work correctly javascript must be enabled and the operation of "pop-up" windows must not be blocked. Click here for more information.
original Greek text with English translation
Arius and Alexander
Arian controversy
Melitius
Meletius
Peter
Sozomen in Greek with English Translation
Church Historian
Migne Greek Text
Patrologiae Graecae Cursus Completus
Patrologia Graeca