What made Arianism so attractive, and might make it so in its modern versions?
Arianism can be exegetically convincing; and certainly, it was consistent to the form of rationality that pervaded in its own time.
But more than this: Arianism was and is a theology which is built up around one's own experience of the invisibilty and intangibility of God. We long indeed for God to be close and evident, to have him tangible in the way we would like to have him tangible; to be able to identify the hot breath of the Spirit on our faces, to feel, really feel the closeness of God in the instances in which we live.
The tangibility that God offers us - his entry into our world is rather disappointing in comparison to this. God the only begotten Son has made him known, walking among us for a short stretch some time ago now. However much the witnesses to him say they are passing on to us that which they have seen with their eyes and touched with their hands, it seems a long way removed from us. It is easy to stare at the flat page of the Bible, to sit through the dull sermon and the uninspired singing, to pray prayers into a remorseless ceiling, and fail to be convinced that God really is with us and active to save.
Arianism is a counsel of despair, then. It keeps the eternal God at an arms length, because he sure feels like he is at arms length. We even create dogmas that convince us that this is true: that because we feel it to be the case, it ought to be the case. Deity could not and would not live among us - it would be a travesty if it did so. We cannot be so arrogant as to claim to have true knowledge, of a personal kind, of the divinity himself. We can only gaze at this Christ, this bridge built - yes made - across the chasm between us and the true God, which we have to steel ourselves to somehow step onto, not ever assured than when we set out on the journey we have stepped into the heart of God himself.
It is despairing: but it is also, attractively, a way to remove the suggestion that God is uncomfortably near - that he is breathing down our necks. It is frightening to think that, if the true God is really among us in Jesus Christ, then the consequences of mistreating his manifestations will be extremely grave. It is frightening to think that the person next me in the pew, whom I have ignored these long years and even secretly despised, actually has life in God himself. It is worrisome to consider that that church that I helped to divide is not only the body of Christ, but that the body of Christ is itself included in God.
[thanks to Kosta Milkov!]
3 comments:
I'm enjoying this little series.
Could you summarise Arianism like this: 'You think Jesus was cool? Well God is even better!'
Orthodoxy, however, sends you back to Jesus to rethink God, not by extrapolating from Jesus to something better, but by letting your evaluative categories be refashioned and reordered in his light.
The re-evaluation of categories certainly seems to be what Barth was after AND it would appear, is what Athanasius was after in the homoousios (according to Torrance anyway).
Keep up the good work MpJ. I am interested to see where this is heading.
After being raised as a Catholic I now find myself to be an Arian. However I do not ignore Jesus of Nazarath. I believe he was at least a great man or a prophet of God. I have chosen to follow Jesus not worship him. He is the example of how one should live their live.
Post a Comment