Huon

Duvduv, Arianism is not "better" or "worse" than Catholicism, except for the bishops, naturally.

It happened that Arianism developed mostly among the Goths, and that the Arian fraction of the gothic nobility won over the pagan fraction. The emperor Valens needed the Arian Goths as soldiers against other Gothic invaders who were pagans. Valens promitted money, grain and a better life to his Arian Goths. He could not keep his promises, and was killed at Adrianople in 382.

His successor Theodosius negociated a compromise and installed the Arian Goths in Thracia, inside the Roman empire. When Theodosius died, in 395, this compromise was abandoned by Alaric and his soldiers, who were menaced by the Huns, and received no help from the emperor. etc... etc...

There was no possibility to eradicate Arianism during this period, this was not and by far, the most important problem.

sotto voce

Nestorians survived outside the empire. Miaphysites survived inside it, but probably because the empire was in no position to tell them that they were wrong.

Duvduv

I did some hunting around online, and history of the Copts shows that the Byzantine empire did engage in persecution in Egypt, and there were two bishops in Alexandria. But apparently the power of the regime was limited because of the overwhelming adherence of the Egyptians to the Coptic church.
So it appears that large numbers and a patriarchal center such as Alexandria could make all the difference for a surviving sect. The nestorians did face persecution in Byzantium but found refuge in Persia.

So each situation had distinct features thst either allowed their survival or their demise. Plus the orthodox regime was not as powerful as their apologetics might suggest, including all the councils and support of the imperial power.

sotto voce

Or to the conviction, on both sides, that Egypt's theology was more orthodox than that of the orthodox, provided polity was hierarchical, and soteriology was legalist, far more important characteristics. That was always the criterion. It still is, up to a point.

Iskander

The council was brought to an end, a month less a day after it began.Constantine invited the bishops to stay on another few weeks in Bithynia so that they could attend his vicennalia-20 years on the throne- with a magnificent banquet that he proposed to give in their honour.

Eusebius describe the occasion with joy:
The bishops were received as guests of honour by the imperial guard; friendly soldiers no longer to be feared.

The council was not an international conference. I don’t think international conference during the Roman Empire makes any sense at all.

Duvduv

Are you referring specifically to the obscure differences in christology, meaning that the Copts considered theirs to be authentic, and that the so-called majorities at the councils were simply politically engineered with most not concerned about the most obscure details?

Iskander

Robin Lane Fox
Page 654


This is what Constantine wrote to Arius and his opposing bishop in Alexandria after the council of Antioch April 324:
“
Bishop Alexander, Constantine wrote, had been reaching “unguardedly” into the meaning of an obscure text in the scripture while Arius had answered him “inconsiderably”. Arius’s heresy’ wrote Constantine, was not “new”, nor did it destroy their broad expanse of common ground. It was best kept as a private speculation on a “tiny and insignificant point,” while the central Christian doctrines were not in doubt. Within broad limits, Christians were not obliged to agree: could not the two of them show charity and concord and reopen their Emperor road to Egypt?
“
Constantine was a tolerant emperor anxious to heal the wounds inflicted on the community by the failure of the pagan policy of the third century.


As Emperor, Constantine still fulfilled the public role of pontifex maximus and allowed the public cults to continue .After his death he was followed by a pagan emperor and after him an Arian emperor: the failure of paganism in Rome is the consequence of the senility that afflicted paganism.
The people of Rome chose Christianity as Constantine himself had done.

sotto voce

Sensible people.

Chili

Nice image Pete, and wasn't there 20.000 of them that they kept outside, furius, wet and wild in the dark?

Chili

Except that filthy dirty word "Christianity" does not belong as it was and always will be the anti-christ in Christendomain where Catholicism is the [only] means to that end.