AHC: Arius triumphs

Best way would probably be to butterfly the conversion of Clovis from Arianism to Nicene Orthodoxy (what Roman Christianity basicly was at this point) ... say by Clotilde (his burgundian wife) not converting him due to being converted to Arianism herself doing her youth in her fathers court where Arianism was quite rampant ...
 
to be specific, Arius believed that the Son was subordinate to the Father.

Nicene/Chalcedonian Orthodoxy says the three Persons of the Trinity are equal to each other, with some disputes on the nature of the Holy Spirit.

at least, as far as i understand.

my main question is, how would a surviving/triumphant Arianism affect Western Europe and the history of Christianity? could it lead to an earlier East-West Schism? what would happen to Western Europe without the link to Rome?
 
to be specific, Arius believed that the Son was subordinate to the Father.

Nicene/Chalcedonian Orthodoxy says the three Persons of the Trinity are equal to each other, with some disputes on the nature of the Holy Spirit.

at least, as far as i understand.

my main question is, how would a surviving/triumphant Arianism affect Western Europe and the history of Christianity? could it lead to an earlier East-West Schism? what would happen to Western Europe without the link to Rome?

The greatest heresy to Nicene Christians was the Arian idea that Christ did not always exist and was created by, and subordinate to, God the Father.
 
The greatest heresy to Nicene Christians was the Arian idea that Christ did not always exist and was created by, and subordinate to, God the Father.

From what I understand of Eastern Orthodoxy, they too believe that the Son is somehow subordinate to the Father, while still maintaining the phrasing of the Athanasian creed (though I cannot see how such is possible).
The idea that Christ did not always exist, though, is the big issue.
 
it's... complicated. really, really complicated.

and that's not even getting into homoousios vs. homoiousios disputes, or the filioque controversy...

but really, i'm looking for the impact on western europe's culture.
 
it's... complicated. really, really complicated.

and that's not even getting into homoousios vs. homoiousios disputes, or the filioque controversy...

but really, i'm looking for the impact on western europe's culture.

It is; I've done reading on it for my own TL, and it gets complicated pretty quickly, without even getting into the developments of Arians as opposed to just the thoughts of Arouse himself.

In any case; unless the triumph occurred during the reign of an Arian Western Emperor, this almost by default means that the Germans are an even more dominant force within the former Empire, I would say. It also means that those Germanic rulers take steps to actually convert the populations they rule over, which goes against their usual desire to use Arianism to keep their people separated from the Roman population.

The post possibility is that an invading German tribe becomes the rulers, and their culture and religion become 'prestige cultures' so that people convert to join the ruling group; like what happened for Islam after the Arab conquests.
 
If Arianism, viewing Jesus as a 'divine' but subordinate figure (like today's Jehovahs Witnesses), wins out then it would have major impacts on Islam, assuming Mohammad or someone like him comes out of the desert with a new creed.

On the one hand, OTLs Islam accepts Jesus as a Prophet, special, but well lower than God, which makes one suspect theyre closer to Arianism than Nicene Christianity; on the other Islam views Trinitarian Christianity as veering towards polytheism. OTL, we can say "there is but one God, he just has three persons/faces/aspects". Arianism muddles the picture a lot. One God and another 'divine being'!?!? That sure looks like polytheism to me, and Im sure it looks even more like that to a Moslem.
 
Is it derailing if I ask some questions on Arianism and corresponding WIs here? If so, let me know and I will repost the questions in a new thread:

Has Arianism always been a negative epithet, even amongst Calvinists and Unitarians during the Reformation Era?

What are the likelihoods and/or environment needed to push the Dutch Reformed Church (is it considered Calvinist) into nontrinitarian Protestantism?

Could the Whigs/More puritanical Protestants of the *Anglican/English-Protestant Church push English Protestantism towards nontrinitarianism? Also, how entrenched are the 39 Articles?

Without Latitudinarianism, could the *Anglican church also move towards nontrinitarianism?

Finally, the big idea, in a surviving Anglo-Dutch union, could Protestanism there take on a nontrinitarian/Unitarian theology?
 
Top