Arianism is a fourth‐century heresy, which affirmed Christ to be divine, but not in the same full sense in which God the Father is divine. Traditional Trinitarianism, with its classical expression in the Nicene Creed, emerged out of controversy with Arianism and defined Christ as being of one substance with the Father. The overall aim of the book is to trace when and where beliefs of an Arian nature have recurred in the subsequent history of Christianity. It begins with an account of the main findings of recent scholarship on fourth‐century Arianism, which involve substantial revision of the t ... More

Arianism is a fourth‐century heresy, which affirmed Christ to be divine, but not in the same full sense in which God the Father is divine. Traditional Trinitarianism, with its classical expression in the Nicene Creed, emerged out of controversy with Arianism and defined Christ as being of one substance with the Father. The overall aim of the book is to trace when and where beliefs of an Arian nature have recurred in the subsequent history of Christianity. It begins with an account of the main findings of recent scholarship on fourth‐century Arianism, which involve substantial revision of the traditional picture of the faithful orthodox defending sacred truth against the evil heretics. It goes on to provide survey accounts of Gothic Christianity, of references to Arianism in the Middle Ages, and of the resurgence of Arian‐type beliefs in the continental Reformation. There is a major concentration on eighteenth‐century Britain, where many leading intellectual figures favoured a view of the Trinity close to that of early Arianism. In particular, there are detailed studies of the theological beliefs of Isaac Newton, William Whiston, and Samuel Clarke. The collapse of these views (and the similar views of many leading heterodox dissenters) into Unitarianism is traced out, and reasons for that development offered. The final chapter looks at the development of the historical study of Arianism in Britain from John Henry Newman to Rowan Williams, with special regard for the relation between the scholars’ faith and scholarly judgement. Finally a brief epilogue asks about the implication of this historical study for contemporary Trinitarian faith.