Question: Did bribery work in convincing Liberius to believe the Arians?

Answer: were refused

Constantius, ordered Liberius into exile in 356 giving him, then, three days to comply. He was ordered into banishment to Beroea, in Thrace; Beroea (Thrace). <hl> He sent expensive presents, too, if he were to accept the Arian position but were refused . <hl> He sent him, indeed, five hundred pieces of gold "to bear his charges" but Liberius refused them, saying, he might bestow them on his flatters; as he did also a like present from the empress, bidding the messenger learn to believe in Christ, and not to persecute the Church of God. Attempts were made to leave the presents in The Church, but Liberius threw them out. Constantius hereupon sent for him under a strict guard to Milan, where, in a conference recorded by Theodoret, he boldly told Constantius that Athanasius had been acquitted at Sardica, and his enemies proved calumniators (see: "calumny") and impostors, and that it was unjust to condemn a person who could not be legally convicted of any crime. The emperor was reduced to silence on every article, but being the more out of patience, ordered him into banishment. Liberius went into exile. Constantius, after two years went to Rome to celebrate the twentieth year of his reign. The ladies joined in a petition to him that he would restore Liberius. He assented, upon condition that he should comply with the bishops, then, at court. He subscribed the condemnation of Athanasius, and a confession or creed which had been framed by the Arians at Sirmium. And he no sooner had recovered his see that he declared himself for the Creed of Niceae, as Theodoret testifies. (Theodoret, Hist. lib. ii. c. 17.). The Emperor knew what he wanted people to believe. So did the bishops at his court. Athanasius stuck by the orthodox creed. Constantius was an avowed Arian, became sole ruler in 350, at the death of his brother, Constans.

Constantius, ordered Liberius into exile in 356 giving him, then, three days to comply. He was ordered into banishment to Beroea, in Thrace; Beroea (Thrace). He sent expensive presents, too, if he were to accept the Arian position but <hl> were refused <hl>. He sent him, indeed, five hundred pieces of gold "to bear his charges" but Liberius refused them, saying, he might bestow them on his flatters; as he did also a like present from the empress, bidding the messenger learn to believe in Christ, and not to persecute the Church of God. Attempts were made to leave the presents in The Church, but Liberius threw them out. Constantius hereupon sent for him under a strict guard to Milan, where, in a conference recorded by Theodoret, he boldly told Constantius that Athanasius had been acquitted at Sardica, and his enemies proved calumniators (see: "calumny") and impostors, and that it was unjust to condemn a person who could not be legally convicted of any crime. The emperor was reduced to silence on every article, but being the more out of patience, ordered him into banishment. Liberius went into exile. Constantius, after two years went to Rome to celebrate the twentieth year of his reign. The ladies joined in a petition to him that he would restore Liberius. He assented, upon condition that he should comply with the bishops, then, at court. He subscribed the condemnation of Athanasius, and a confession or creed which had been framed by the Arians at Sirmium. And he no sooner had recovered his see that he declared himself for the Creed of Niceae, as Theodoret testifies. (Theodoret, Hist. lib. ii. c. 17.). The Emperor knew what he wanted people to believe. So did the bishops at his court. Athanasius stuck by the orthodox creed. Constantius was an avowed Arian, became sole ruler in 350, at the death of his brother, Constans.

He sent expensive presents, too, if he were to accept the Arian position but <hl> were refused <hl> .


Question: What did Liberius have to promise to do in order to return?

Constantius, ordered Liberius into exile in 356 giving him, then, three days to comply. He was ordered into banishment to Beroea, in Thrace; Beroea (Thrace). He sent expensive presents, too, if he were to accept the Arian position but were refused. He sent him, indeed, five hundred pieces of gold "to bear his charges" but Liberius refused them, saying, he might bestow them on his flatters; as he did also a like present from the empress, bidding the messenger learn to believe in Christ, and not to persecute the Church of God. Attempts were made to leave the presents in The Church, but Liberius threw them out. Constantius hereupon sent for him under a strict guard to Milan, where, in a conference recorded by Theodoret, he boldly told Constantius that Athanasius had been acquitted at Sardica, and his enemies proved calumniators (see: "calumny") and impostors, and that it was unjust to condemn a person who could not be legally convicted of any crime. The emperor was reduced to silence on every article, but being the more out of patience, ordered him into banishment. Liberius went into exile. Constantius, after two years went to Rome to celebrate the twentieth year of his reign. The ladies joined in a petition to him that he would restore Liberius. He assented, upon condition that he should comply with the bishops, then, at court. He subscribed the condemnation of Athanasius, and a confession or creed which had been framed by the Arians at Sirmium. And he no sooner had recovered his see that he declared himself for the Creed of Niceae, as Theodoret testifies. (Theodoret, Hist. lib. ii. c. 17.). The Emperor knew what he wanted people to believe. So did the bishops at his court. Athanasius stuck by the orthodox creed. Constantius was an avowed Arian, became sole ruler in 350, at the death of his brother, Constans.

Answer: comply with the bishops

Constantius, ordered Liberius into exile in 356 giving him, then, three days to comply. He was ordered into banishment to Beroea, in Thrace; Beroea (Thrace). He sent expensive presents, too, if he were to accept the Arian position but were refused. He sent him, indeed, five hundred pieces of gold "to bear his charges" but Liberius refused them, saying, he might bestow them on his flatters; as he did also a like present from the empress, bidding the messenger learn to believe in Christ, and not to persecute the Church of God. Attempts were made to leave the presents in The Church, but Liberius threw them out. Constantius hereupon sent for him under a strict guard to Milan, where, in a conference recorded by Theodoret, he boldly told Constantius that Athanasius had been acquitted at Sardica, and his enemies proved calumniators (see: "calumny") and impostors, and that it was unjust to condemn a person who could not be legally convicted of any crime. The emperor was reduced to silence on every article, but being the more out of patience, ordered him into banishment. Liberius went into exile. Constantius, after two years went to Rome to celebrate the twentieth year of his reign. The ladies joined in a petition to him that he would restore Liberius. <hl> He assented, upon condition that he should comply with the bishops , then, at court. <hl> He subscribed the condemnation of Athanasius, and a confession or creed which had been framed by the Arians at Sirmium. And he no sooner had recovered his see that he declared himself for the Creed of Niceae, as Theodoret testifies. (Theodoret, Hist. lib. ii. c. 17.). The Emperor knew what he wanted people to believe. So did the bishops at his court. Athanasius stuck by the orthodox creed. Constantius was an avowed Arian, became sole ruler in 350, at the death of his brother, Constans.

Constantius, ordered Liberius into exile in 356 giving him, then, three days to comply. He was ordered into banishment to Beroea, in Thrace; Beroea (Thrace). He sent expensive presents, too, if he were to accept the Arian position but were refused. He sent him, indeed, five hundred pieces of gold "to bear his charges" but Liberius refused them, saying, he might bestow them on his flatters; as he did also a like present from the empress, bidding the messenger learn to believe in Christ, and not to persecute the Church of God. Attempts were made to leave the presents in The Church, but Liberius threw them out. Constantius hereupon sent for him under a strict guard to Milan, where, in a conference recorded by Theodoret, he boldly told Constantius that Athanasius had been acquitted at Sardica, and his enemies proved calumniators (see: "calumny") and impostors, and that it was unjust to condemn a person who could not be legally convicted of any crime. The emperor was reduced to silence on every article, but being the more out of patience, ordered him into banishment. Liberius went into exile. Constantius, after two years went to Rome to celebrate the twentieth year of his reign. The ladies joined in a petition to him that he would restore Liberius. He assented, upon condition that he should <hl> comply with the bishops <hl>, then, at court. He subscribed the condemnation of Athanasius, and a confession or creed which had been framed by the Arians at Sirmium. And he no sooner had recovered his see that he declared himself for the Creed of Niceae, as Theodoret testifies. (Theodoret, Hist. lib. ii. c. 17.). The Emperor knew what he wanted people to believe. So did the bishops at his court. Athanasius stuck by the orthodox creed. Constantius was an avowed Arian, became sole ruler in 350, at the death of his brother, Constans.

He assented, upon condition that he should <hl> comply with the bishops <hl> , then, at court.


Question: At what point could Athanasius return to Alexandria?

When Emperor Constantine I died, Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria. Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor Constantius II, renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338. Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of Constans, the Emperor of the West. During this time, Gregory of Cappadocia was installed as the Patriarch of Alexandria, usurping the absent Athanasius. Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual Festal Letters, in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year.

Answer: When Emperor Constantine I died

<hl> When Emperor Constantine I died , Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria. <hl> Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor Constantius II, renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338. Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of Constans, the Emperor of the West. During this time, Gregory of Cappadocia was installed as the Patriarch of Alexandria, usurping the absent Athanasius. Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual Festal Letters, in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year.

<hl> When Emperor Constantine I died <hl>, Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria. Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor Constantius II, renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338. Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of Constans, the Emperor of the West. During this time, Gregory of Cappadocia was installed as the Patriarch of Alexandria, usurping the absent Athanasius. Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual Festal Letters, in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year.

<hl> When Emperor Constantine I died <hl> , Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria.


Question: Who provided for his protection while he was in Rome?

Answer: Constans

When Emperor Constantine I died, Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria. Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor Constantius II, renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338. <hl> Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of Constans , the Emperor of the West. <hl> During this time, Gregory of Cappadocia was installed as the Patriarch of Alexandria, usurping the absent Athanasius. Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual Festal Letters, in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year.

When Emperor Constantine I died, Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria. Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor Constantius II, renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338. Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of <hl> Constans <hl>, the Emperor of the West. During this time, Gregory of Cappadocia was installed as the Patriarch of Alexandria, usurping the absent Athanasius. Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual Festal Letters, in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year.

Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of <hl> Constans <hl> , the Emperor of the West.


Question: Who became Patriarch in Alexandria while Athanasius was away?

Answer: Gregory of Cappadocia

When Emperor Constantine I died, Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria. Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor Constantius II, renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338. Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of Constans, the Emperor of the West. <hl> During this time, Gregory of Cappadocia was installed as the Patriarch of Alexandria, usurping the absent Athanasius. <hl> Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual Festal Letters, in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year.

When Emperor Constantine I died, Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria. Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor Constantius II, renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338. Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of Constans, the Emperor of the West. During this time, <hl> Gregory of Cappadocia <hl> was installed as the Patriarch of Alexandria, usurping the absent Athanasius. Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual Festal Letters, in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year.


Question: How did the people of Alexandria know when to celebrate Easter?

Answer: Festal Letters

When Emperor Constantine I died, Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria. Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor Constantius II, renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338. Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of Constans, the Emperor of the West. During this time, Gregory of Cappadocia was installed as the Patriarch of Alexandria, usurping the absent Athanasius. <hl> Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual Festal Letters , in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year. <hl>

When Emperor Constantine I died, Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria. Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor Constantius II, renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338. Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of Constans, the Emperor of the West. During this time, Gregory of Cappadocia was installed as the Patriarch of Alexandria, usurping the absent Athanasius. Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual <hl> Festal Letters <hl>, in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year.

Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual <hl> Festal Letters <hl> , in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year.


Question: Who declared Athanasius to be exiled again?

Answer: Constantius II

When Emperor Constantine I died, Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria. <hl> Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor Constantius II , renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338. <hl> Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of Constans, the Emperor of the West. During this time, Gregory of Cappadocia was installed as the Patriarch of Alexandria, usurping the absent Athanasius. Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual Festal Letters, in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year.

When Emperor Constantine I died, Athanasius was allowed to return to his See of Alexandria. Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor <hl> Constantius II <hl>, renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338. Athanasius went to Rome, where he was under the protection of Constans, the Emperor of the West. During this time, Gregory of Cappadocia was installed as the Patriarch of Alexandria, usurping the absent Athanasius. Athanasius did, however, remain in contact with his people through his annual Festal Letters, in which he also announced on which date Easter would be celebrated that year.

Shortly thereafter, however, Constantine's son, the new Roman Emperor <hl> Constantius II <hl> , renewed the order for Athanasius's banishment in 338.


Question: Why did the Bishops condemn Athanasius?

T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII: By Constantius's order, the sole ruler of The Roman Empire at the death of his brother Constans, the Council of Arles in 353, was held, which was presided over by Vincent, Bishop of Capua, in the name of Pope Liberius. The fathers terrified of the threats of the Emperor, an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius. The Pope refused to accept their decision, and requested the Emperor to hold another Council, in which the charges against Athanasius could be freely investigated. To this Constantius consented, for he felt able to control it, at Milan. Milan was named as the place, here three hundred bishops assembled, most from the West, only a few from the East, in 355. They met in the Church of Milan. Shortly, the Emperor ordered them to a hall in the Imperial Palace, thus ending any free debate. He presented an Arian formula of faith for their acceptance. He threatened any who refused with exile and death. All, with the exception of Dionysius (bishop of Milan), and the two Papal Legates, viz., Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari, consented to the Arian Creed and the condemnation of Athanasius. Those who refused were sent into exile. The decrees were forwarded to the Pope for approval, but were rejected, because of the violence to which the bishops were subjected.

Answer: threats of the Emperor

T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII: By Constantius's order, the sole ruler of The Roman Empire at the death of his brother Constans, the Council of Arles in 353, was held, which was presided over by Vincent, Bishop of Capua, in the name of Pope Liberius. <hl> The fathers terrified of the threats of the Emperor , an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius. <hl> The Pope refused to accept their decision, and requested the Emperor to hold another Council, in which the charges against Athanasius could be freely investigated. To this Constantius consented, for he felt able to control it, at Milan. Milan was named as the place, here three hundred bishops assembled, most from the West, only a few from the East, in 355. They met in the Church of Milan. Shortly, the Emperor ordered them to a hall in the Imperial Palace, thus ending any free debate. He presented an Arian formula of faith for their acceptance. He threatened any who refused with exile and death. All, with the exception of Dionysius (bishop of Milan), and the two Papal Legates, viz., Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari, consented to the Arian Creed and the condemnation of Athanasius. Those who refused were sent into exile. The decrees were forwarded to the Pope for approval, but were rejected, because of the violence to which the bishops were subjected.

T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII: By Constantius's order, the sole ruler of The Roman Empire at the death of his brother Constans, the Council of Arles in 353, was held, which was presided over by Vincent, Bishop of Capua, in the name of Pope Liberius. The fathers terrified of the <hl> threats of the Emperor <hl>, an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius. The Pope refused to accept their decision, and requested the Emperor to hold another Council, in which the charges against Athanasius could be freely investigated. To this Constantius consented, for he felt able to control it, at Milan. Milan was named as the place, here three hundred bishops assembled, most from the West, only a few from the East, in 355. They met in the Church of Milan. Shortly, the Emperor ordered them to a hall in the Imperial Palace, thus ending any free debate. He presented an Arian formula of faith for their acceptance. He threatened any who refused with exile and death. All, with the exception of Dionysius (bishop of Milan), and the two Papal Legates, viz., Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari, consented to the Arian Creed and the condemnation of Athanasius. Those who refused were sent into exile. The decrees were forwarded to the Pope for approval, but were rejected, because of the violence to which the bishops were subjected.

The fathers terrified of the <hl> threats of the Emperor <hl> , an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius.


Question: What happened to the Bishops who did not take the oath?

Answer: sent into exile

T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII: By Constantius's order, the sole ruler of The Roman Empire at the death of his brother Constans, the Council of Arles in 353, was held, which was presided over by Vincent, Bishop of Capua, in the name of Pope Liberius. The fathers terrified of the threats of the Emperor, an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius. The Pope refused to accept their decision, and requested the Emperor to hold another Council, in which the charges against Athanasius could be freely investigated. To this Constantius consented, for he felt able to control it, at Milan. Milan was named as the place, here three hundred bishops assembled, most from the West, only a few from the East, in 355. They met in the Church of Milan. Shortly, the Emperor ordered them to a hall in the Imperial Palace, thus ending any free debate. He presented an Arian formula of faith for their acceptance. He threatened any who refused with exile and death. All, with the exception of Dionysius (bishop of Milan), and the two Papal Legates, viz., Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari, consented to the Arian Creed and the condemnation of Athanasius. <hl> Those who refused were sent into exile . <hl> The decrees were forwarded to the Pope for approval, but were rejected, because of the violence to which the bishops were subjected.

T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII: By Constantius's order, the sole ruler of The Roman Empire at the death of his brother Constans, the Council of Arles in 353, was held, which was presided over by Vincent, Bishop of Capua, in the name of Pope Liberius. The fathers terrified of the threats of the Emperor, an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius. The Pope refused to accept their decision, and requested the Emperor to hold another Council, in which the charges against Athanasius could be freely investigated. To this Constantius consented, for he felt able to control it, at Milan. Milan was named as the place, here three hundred bishops assembled, most from the West, only a few from the East, in 355. They met in the Church of Milan. Shortly, the Emperor ordered them to a hall in the Imperial Palace, thus ending any free debate. He presented an Arian formula of faith for their acceptance. He threatened any who refused with exile and death. All, with the exception of Dionysius (bishop of Milan), and the two Papal Legates, viz., Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari, consented to the Arian Creed and the condemnation of Athanasius. Those who refused were <hl> sent into exile <hl>. The decrees were forwarded to the Pope for approval, but were rejected, because of the violence to which the bishops were subjected.

Those who refused were <hl> sent into exile <hl> .


Question: Did the Pope agree with this order?

Answer: Pope refused to accept

T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII: By Constantius's order, the sole ruler of The Roman Empire at the death of his brother Constans, the Council of Arles in 353, was held, which was presided over by Vincent, Bishop of Capua, in the name of Pope Liberius. The fathers terrified of the threats of the Emperor, an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius. <hl> The Pope refused to accept their decision, and requested the Emperor to hold another Council, in which the charges against Athanasius could be freely investigated. <hl> To this Constantius consented, for he felt able to control it, at Milan. Milan was named as the place, here three hundred bishops assembled, most from the West, only a few from the East, in 355. They met in the Church of Milan. Shortly, the Emperor ordered them to a hall in the Imperial Palace, thus ending any free debate. He presented an Arian formula of faith for their acceptance. He threatened any who refused with exile and death. All, with the exception of Dionysius (bishop of Milan), and the two Papal Legates, viz., Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari, consented to the Arian Creed and the condemnation of Athanasius. Those who refused were sent into exile. The decrees were forwarded to the Pope for approval, but were rejected, because of the violence to which the bishops were subjected.

T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII: By Constantius's order, the sole ruler of The Roman Empire at the death of his brother Constans, the Council of Arles in 353, was held, which was presided over by Vincent, Bishop of Capua, in the name of Pope Liberius. The fathers terrified of the threats of the Emperor, an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius. The <hl> Pope refused to accept <hl> their decision, and requested the Emperor to hold another Council, in which the charges against Athanasius could be freely investigated. To this Constantius consented, for he felt able to control it, at Milan. Milan was named as the place, here three hundred bishops assembled, most from the West, only a few from the East, in 355. They met in the Church of Milan. Shortly, the Emperor ordered them to a hall in the Imperial Palace, thus ending any free debate. He presented an Arian formula of faith for their acceptance. He threatened any who refused with exile and death. All, with the exception of Dionysius (bishop of Milan), and the two Papal Legates, viz., Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari, consented to the Arian Creed and the condemnation of Athanasius. Those who refused were sent into exile. The decrees were forwarded to the Pope for approval, but were rejected, because of the violence to which the bishops were subjected.


Question: Did the Emperor agree to a new trial for Athanasius?

Answer: Constantius consented

T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII: By Constantius's order, the sole ruler of The Roman Empire at the death of his brother Constans, the Council of Arles in 353, was held, which was presided over by Vincent, Bishop of Capua, in the name of Pope Liberius. The fathers terrified of the threats of the Emperor, an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius. The Pope refused to accept their decision, and requested the Emperor to hold another Council, in which the charges against Athanasius could be freely investigated. <hl> To this Constantius consented , for he felt able to control it, at Milan. <hl> Milan was named as the place, here three hundred bishops assembled, most from the West, only a few from the East, in 355. They met in the Church of Milan. Shortly, the Emperor ordered them to a hall in the Imperial Palace, thus ending any free debate. He presented an Arian formula of faith for their acceptance. He threatened any who refused with exile and death. All, with the exception of Dionysius (bishop of Milan), and the two Papal Legates, viz., Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari, consented to the Arian Creed and the condemnation of Athanasius. Those who refused were sent into exile. The decrees were forwarded to the Pope for approval, but were rejected, because of the violence to which the bishops were subjected.

T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII: By Constantius's order, the sole ruler of The Roman Empire at the death of his brother Constans, the Council of Arles in 353, was held, which was presided over by Vincent, Bishop of Capua, in the name of Pope Liberius. The fathers terrified of the threats of the Emperor, an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius. The Pope refused to accept their decision, and requested the Emperor to hold another Council, in which the charges against Athanasius could be freely investigated. To this <hl> Constantius consented <hl>, for he felt able to control it, at Milan. Milan was named as the place, here three hundred bishops assembled, most from the West, only a few from the East, in 355. They met in the Church of Milan. Shortly, the Emperor ordered them to a hall in the Imperial Palace, thus ending any free debate. He presented an Arian formula of faith for their acceptance. He threatened any who refused with exile and death. All, with the exception of Dionysius (bishop of Milan), and the two Papal Legates, viz., Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari, consented to the Arian Creed and the condemnation of Athanasius. Those who refused were sent into exile. The decrees were forwarded to the Pope for approval, but were rejected, because of the violence to which the bishops were subjected.

To this <hl> Constantius consented <hl> , for he felt able to control it, at Milan.


Question: What oath did the Bishops have to take at the trial?

Answer: Arian formula of faith

T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII: By Constantius's order, the sole ruler of The Roman Empire at the death of his brother Constans, the Council of Arles in 353, was held, which was presided over by Vincent, Bishop of Capua, in the name of Pope Liberius. The fathers terrified of the threats of the Emperor, an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius. The Pope refused to accept their decision, and requested the Emperor to hold another Council, in which the charges against Athanasius could be freely investigated. To this Constantius consented, for he felt able to control it, at Milan. Milan was named as the place, here three hundred bishops assembled, most from the West, only a few from the East, in 355. They met in the Church of Milan. Shortly, the Emperor ordered them to a hall in the Imperial Palace, thus ending any free debate. <hl> He presented an Arian formula of faith for their acceptance. <hl> He threatened any who refused with exile and death. All, with the exception of Dionysius (bishop of Milan), and the two Papal Legates, viz., Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari, consented to the Arian Creed and the condemnation of Athanasius. Those who refused were sent into exile. The decrees were forwarded to the Pope for approval, but were rejected, because of the violence to which the bishops were subjected.

T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII: By Constantius's order, the sole ruler of The Roman Empire at the death of his brother Constans, the Council of Arles in 353, was held, which was presided over by Vincent, Bishop of Capua, in the name of Pope Liberius. The fathers terrified of the threats of the Emperor, an avowed Arian, they consented to the condemnation of Athanasius. The Pope refused to accept their decision, and requested the Emperor to hold another Council, in which the charges against Athanasius could be freely investigated. To this Constantius consented, for he felt able to control it, at Milan. Milan was named as the place, here three hundred bishops assembled, most from the West, only a few from the East, in 355. They met in the Church of Milan. Shortly, the Emperor ordered them to a hall in the Imperial Palace, thus ending any free debate. He presented an <hl> Arian formula of faith <hl> for their acceptance. He threatened any who refused with exile and death. All, with the exception of Dionysius (bishop of Milan), and the two Papal Legates, viz., Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari, consented to the Arian Creed and the condemnation of Athanasius. Those who refused were sent into exile. The decrees were forwarded to the Pope for approval, but were rejected, because of the violence to which the bishops were subjected.


Question: What happened to Bishop George?

In 361, after the death of Emperor Constantius, shortly followed by the murder of the very unpopular Bishop George, Athanasius returned to his patriarchate. The following year he convened a council at Alexandria, and presided over it with Eusebius of Vercelli. Athanasius appealed for unity among all those who had faith in Christianity, even if they differed on matters of terminology. This prepared the groundwork for his definition of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. However, the council also was directed against those who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, the human soul of Christ, and Christ's divinity. Mild measures were agreed on for those heretic bishops who repented, but severe penance was decreed for the chief leaders of the major heresies.

Answer: murder

<hl> In 361, after the death of Emperor Constantius, shortly followed by the murder of the very unpopular Bishop George <hl> , Athanasius returned to his patriarchate. The following year he convened a council at Alexandria, and presided over it with Eusebius of Vercelli. Athanasius appealed for unity among all those who had faith in Christianity, even if they differed on matters of terminology. This prepared the groundwork for his definition of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. However, the council also was directed against those who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, the human soul of Christ, and Christ's divinity. Mild measures were agreed on for those heretic bishops who repented, but severe penance was decreed for the chief leaders of the major heresies.

In 361, after the death of Emperor Constantius, shortly followed by the <hl> murder <hl> of the very unpopular Bishop George, Athanasius returned to his patriarchate. The following year he convened a council at Alexandria, and presided over it with Eusebius of Vercelli. Athanasius appealed for unity among all those who had faith in Christianity, even if they differed on matters of terminology. This prepared the groundwork for his definition of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. However, the council also was directed against those who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, the human soul of Christ, and Christ's divinity. Mild measures were agreed on for those heretic bishops who repented, but severe penance was decreed for the chief leaders of the major heresies.


Question: What happened to Bishop leaders who did not agree with the doctrine?

Answer: severe penance

In 361, after the death of Emperor Constantius, shortly followed by the murder of the very unpopular Bishop George, Athanasius returned to his patriarchate. The following year he convened a council at Alexandria, and presided over it with Eusebius of Vercelli. Athanasius appealed for unity among all those who had faith in Christianity, even if they differed on matters of terminology. This prepared the groundwork for his definition of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. However, the council also was directed against those who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, the human soul of Christ, and Christ's divinity. <hl> Mild measures were agreed on for those heretic bishops who repented, but severe penance was decreed for the chief leaders of the major heresies. <hl>

In 361, after the death of Emperor Constantius, shortly followed by the murder of the very unpopular Bishop George, Athanasius returned to his patriarchate. The following year he convened a council at Alexandria, and presided over it with Eusebius of Vercelli. Athanasius appealed for unity among all those who had faith in Christianity, even if they differed on matters of terminology. This prepared the groundwork for his definition of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. However, the council also was directed against those who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, the human soul of Christ, and Christ's divinity. Mild measures were agreed on for those heretic bishops who repented, but <hl> severe penance <hl> was decreed for the chief leaders of the major heresies.


Question: When did Athanasius return to his position as Patriarch?

Answer: after the death of Emperor Constantius

<hl> In 361, after the death of Emperor Constantius , shortly followed by the murder of the very unpopular Bishop George, Athanasius returned to his patriarchate. <hl> The following year he convened a council at Alexandria, and presided over it with Eusebius of Vercelli. Athanasius appealed for unity among all those who had faith in Christianity, even if they differed on matters of terminology. This prepared the groundwork for his definition of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. However, the council also was directed against those who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, the human soul of Christ, and Christ's divinity. Mild measures were agreed on for those heretic bishops who repented, but severe penance was decreed for the chief leaders of the major heresies.

In 361, <hl> after the death of Emperor Constantius <hl>, shortly followed by the murder of the very unpopular Bishop George, Athanasius returned to his patriarchate. The following year he convened a council at Alexandria, and presided over it with Eusebius of Vercelli. Athanasius appealed for unity among all those who had faith in Christianity, even if they differed on matters of terminology. This prepared the groundwork for his definition of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. However, the council also was directed against those who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, the human soul of Christ, and Christ's divinity. Mild measures were agreed on for those heretic bishops who repented, but severe penance was decreed for the chief leaders of the major heresies.

In 361, <hl> after the death of Emperor Constantius <hl> , shortly followed by the murder of the very unpopular Bishop George, Athanasius returned to his patriarchate.


Question: Who joined him when he formed a council to encourage unity among Christians?

Answer: Eusebius of Vercelli

In 361, after the death of Emperor Constantius, shortly followed by the murder of the very unpopular Bishop George, Athanasius returned to his patriarchate. <hl> The following year he convened a council at Alexandria, and presided over it with Eusebius of Vercelli . <hl> Athanasius appealed for unity among all those who had faith in Christianity, even if they differed on matters of terminology. This prepared the groundwork for his definition of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. However, the council also was directed against those who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, the human soul of Christ, and Christ's divinity. Mild measures were agreed on for those heretic bishops who repented, but severe penance was decreed for the chief leaders of the major heresies.

In 361, after the death of Emperor Constantius, shortly followed by the murder of the very unpopular Bishop George, Athanasius returned to his patriarchate. The following year he convened a council at Alexandria, and presided over it with <hl> Eusebius of Vercelli <hl>. Athanasius appealed for unity among all those who had faith in Christianity, even if they differed on matters of terminology. This prepared the groundwork for his definition of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. However, the council also was directed against those who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, the human soul of Christ, and Christ's divinity. Mild measures were agreed on for those heretic bishops who repented, but severe penance was decreed for the chief leaders of the major heresies.

The following year he convened a council at Alexandria, and presided over it with <hl> Eusebius of Vercelli <hl> .


Question: What Christian beliefs did Emperor Valens adhere to?

Two years later, the Emperor Valens, who favored the Arian position, in his turn exiled Athanasius. This time however, Athanasius simply left for the outskirts of Alexandria, where he stayed for only a few months before the local authorities convinced Valens to retract his order of exile. Some early reports state that Athanasius spent this period of exile at his family's ancestral tomb in a Christian cemetery. It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in his father's tomb. (Soz., "Hist. Eccl.", VI, xii; Soc., "Hist. Eccl.", IV, xii).

Answer: Arian

<hl> Two years later, the Emperor Valens, who favored the Arian position, in his turn exiled Athanasius. <hl> This time however, Athanasius simply left for the outskirts of Alexandria, where he stayed for only a few months before the local authorities convinced Valens to retract his order of exile. Some early reports state that Athanasius spent this period of exile at his family's ancestral tomb in a Christian cemetery. It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in his father's tomb. (Soz., "Hist. Eccl. ", VI, xii; Soc., "Hist. Eccl. ", IV, xii).

Two years later, the Emperor Valens, who favored the <hl> Arian <hl> position, in his turn exiled Athanasius. This time however, Athanasius simply left for the outskirts of Alexandria, where he stayed for only a few months before the local authorities convinced Valens to retract his order of exile. Some early reports state that Athanasius spent this period of exile at his family's ancestral tomb in a Christian cemetery. It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in his father's tomb. (Soz., "Hist. Eccl.", VI, xii; Soc., "Hist. Eccl.", IV, xii).


Question: Where did Athanasius during his latest exile?

Answer: outskirts of Alexandria

Two years later, the Emperor Valens, who favored the Arian position, in his turn exiled Athanasius. <hl> This time however, Athanasius simply left for the outskirts of Alexandria , where he stayed for only a few months before the local authorities convinced Valens to retract his order of exile. <hl> Some early reports state that Athanasius spent this period of exile at his family's ancestral tomb in a Christian cemetery. It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in his father's tomb. (Soz., "Hist. Eccl. ", VI, xii; Soc., "Hist. Eccl. ", IV, xii).

Two years later, the Emperor Valens, who favored the Arian position, in his turn exiled Athanasius. This time however, Athanasius simply left for the <hl> outskirts of Alexandria <hl>, where he stayed for only a few months before the local authorities convinced Valens to retract his order of exile. Some early reports state that Athanasius spent this period of exile at his family's ancestral tomb in a Christian cemetery. It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in his father's tomb. (Soz., "Hist. Eccl.", VI, xii; Soc., "Hist. Eccl.", IV, xii).

This time however, Athanasius simply left for the <hl> outskirts of Alexandria <hl> , where he stayed for only a few months before the local authorities convinced Valens to retract his order of exile.


Question: For how long was he exiled this time?

Answer: few months

Two years later, the Emperor Valens, who favored the Arian position, in his turn exiled Athanasius. <hl> This time however, Athanasius simply left for the outskirts of Alexandria, where he stayed for only a few months before the local authorities convinced Valens to retract his order of exile. <hl> Some early reports state that Athanasius spent this period of exile at his family's ancestral tomb in a Christian cemetery. It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in his father's tomb. (Soz., "Hist. Eccl. ", VI, xii; Soc., "Hist. Eccl. ", IV, xii).

Two years later, the Emperor Valens, who favored the Arian position, in his turn exiled Athanasius. This time however, Athanasius simply left for the outskirts of Alexandria, where he stayed for only a <hl> few months <hl> before the local authorities convinced Valens to retract his order of exile. Some early reports state that Athanasius spent this period of exile at his family's ancestral tomb in a Christian cemetery. It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in his father's tomb. (Soz., "Hist. Eccl.", VI, xii; Soc., "Hist. Eccl.", IV, xii).


Question: Where did he hide during this time?

Answer: his father's tomb

Two years later, the Emperor Valens, who favored the Arian position, in his turn exiled Athanasius. This time however, Athanasius simply left for the outskirts of Alexandria, where he stayed for only a few months before the local authorities convinced Valens to retract his order of exile. Some early reports state that Athanasius spent this period of exile at his family's ancestral tomb in a Christian cemetery. <hl> It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in his father's tomb . <hl> (Soz., "Hist. Eccl. ", VI, xii; Soc., "Hist. Eccl. ", IV, xii).

Two years later, the Emperor Valens, who favored the Arian position, in his turn exiled Athanasius. This time however, Athanasius simply left for the outskirts of Alexandria, where he stayed for only a few months before the local authorities convinced Valens to retract his order of exile. Some early reports state that Athanasius spent this period of exile at his family's ancestral tomb in a Christian cemetery. It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in <hl> his father's tomb <hl>. (Soz., "Hist. Eccl.", VI, xii; Soc., "Hist. Eccl.", IV, xii).

It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in <hl> his father's tomb <hl> .


Question: Who convinced Valens to let him return to Alexandria?

Answer: local authorities

Two years later, the Emperor Valens, who favored the Arian position, in his turn exiled Athanasius. <hl> This time however, Athanasius simply left for the outskirts of Alexandria, where he stayed for only a few months before the local authorities convinced Valens to retract his order of exile. <hl> Some early reports state that Athanasius spent this period of exile at his family's ancestral tomb in a Christian cemetery. It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in his father's tomb. (Soz., "Hist. Eccl. ", VI, xii; Soc., "Hist. Eccl. ", IV, xii).

Two years later, the Emperor Valens, who favored the Arian position, in his turn exiled Athanasius. This time however, Athanasius simply left for the outskirts of Alexandria, where he stayed for only a few months before the <hl> local authorities <hl> convinced Valens to retract his order of exile. Some early reports state that Athanasius spent this period of exile at his family's ancestral tomb in a Christian cemetery. It was during this period, the final exile, that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in his father's tomb. (Soz., "Hist. Eccl.", VI, xii; Soc., "Hist. Eccl.", IV, xii).


Question: Who standardized the books of the New Testament?

Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are in use today. Up until then, various similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. Athanasius compiled the list to resolve questions about such texts as The Epistle of Barnabas. Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.

Answer: Athanasius

<hl> Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are in use today. <hl> Up until then, various similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. Athanasius compiled the list to resolve questions about such texts as The Epistle of Barnabas. Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.

<hl> Athanasius <hl> is the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are in use today. Up until then, various similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. Athanasius compiled the list to resolve questions about such texts as The Epistle of Barnabas. Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.


Question: What books were used before his decision to standardize?

Answer: various

Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are in use today. <hl> Up until then, various similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. <hl> Athanasius compiled the list to resolve questions about such texts as The Epistle of Barnabas. Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.

Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are in use today. Up until then, <hl> various <hl> similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. Athanasius compiled the list to resolve questions about such texts as The Epistle of Barnabas. Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.


Question: How many books are listed that should be included but were not?

Answer: 7 books

<hl> Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 2 7 books of the New Testament that are in use today. <hl> Up until then, various similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. Athanasius compiled the list to resolve questions about such texts as The Epistle of Barnabas. Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.

Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 2<hl> 7 books <hl> of the New Testament that are in use today. Up until then, various similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. Athanasius compiled the list to resolve questions about such texts as The Epistle of Barnabas. Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.

Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 2 <hl> 7 books <hl> of the New Testament that are in use today.


Question: How many books are in the New Testament?

Answer: 27 books

<hl> Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are in use today. <hl> Up until then, various similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. Athanasius compiled the list to resolve questions about such texts as The Epistle of Barnabas. Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.

Athanasius is the first person to identify the same <hl> 27 books <hl> of the New Testament that are in use today. Up until then, various similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. Athanasius compiled the list to resolve questions about such texts as The Epistle of Barnabas. Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.


Question: Have those books changed over time?

Answer: in use today

<hl> Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are in use today . <hl> Up until then, various similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. Athanasius compiled the list to resolve questions about such texts as The Epistle of Barnabas. Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.

Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are <hl> in use today <hl>. Up until then, various similar lists of works to be read in churches were in use. Athanasius compiled the list to resolve questions about such texts as The Epistle of Barnabas. Athanasius includes the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah and places the Book of Esther among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.

Athanasius is the first person to identify the same 27 books of the New Testament that are <hl> in use today <hl> .


Question: Did Athanasius feel that it was important to believe that Jesus was the Son of God?

Perhaps, his most notable letter was his Festal Letter, written to his Church in Alexandria when he was in exile, as he could not be in their presence. This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is not optional but necessary; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you. Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?

Answer: not optional but necessary

Perhaps, his most notable letter was his Festal Letter, written to his Church in Alexandria when he was in exile, as he could not be in their presence. <hl> This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is not optional but necessary ; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. <hl> For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you. Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?

Perhaps, his most notable letter was his Festal Letter, written to his Church in Alexandria when he was in exile, as he could not be in their presence. This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is <hl> not optional but necessary <hl>; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you. Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?

This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is <hl> not optional but necessary <hl> ; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places.


Question: Did his place more value on his Faith or where he was living?

Answer: the true Faith

Perhaps, his most notable letter was his Festal Letter, written to his Church in Alexandria when he was in exile, as he could not be in their presence. This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is not optional but necessary; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. <hl> They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith ; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you. <hl> Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?

Perhaps, his most notable letter was his Festal Letter, written to his Church in Alexandria when he was in exile, as he could not be in their presence. This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is not optional but necessary; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of <hl> the true Faith <hl>; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you. Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?

They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of <hl> the true Faith <hl> ; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you.


Question: Did he think that the people that had exiled him were true believers?

Answer: outside of the true Faith

Perhaps, his most notable letter was his Festal Letter, written to his Church in Alexandria when he was in exile, as he could not be in their presence. This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is not optional but necessary; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. <hl> They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith ; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you. <hl> Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?

Perhaps, his most notable letter was his Festal Letter, written to his Church in Alexandria when he was in exile, as he could not be in their presence. This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is not optional but necessary; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. They are, it is true, in the places, but <hl> outside of the true Faith <hl>; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you. Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?

They are, it is true, in the places, but <hl> outside of the true Faith <hl> ; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you.


Question: Where did Athanasius think Faith resides?

Answer: within you

Perhaps, his most notable letter was his Festal Letter, written to his Church in Alexandria when he was in exile, as he could not be in their presence. This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is not optional but necessary; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. <hl> They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you . <hl> Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?

Perhaps, his most notable letter was his Festal Letter, written to his Church in Alexandria when he was in exile, as he could not be in their presence. This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is not optional but necessary; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, <hl> within you <hl>. Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?

They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, <hl> within you <hl> .


Question: Who was the Festal Letter written for?

Answer: his Church in Alexandria

<hl> Perhaps, his most notable letter was his Festal Letter, written to his Church in Alexandria when he was in exile, as he could not be in their presence. <hl> This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is not optional but necessary; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you. Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?

Perhaps, his most notable letter was his Festal Letter, written to <hl> his Church in Alexandria <hl> when he was in exile, as he could not be in their presence. This letter shows clearly his stand that accepting Jesus is the Divine Son of God is not optional but necessary; "I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you. Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith?


Question: How did the people know that Alexander had chosen Athanasius as his successor?

Alban Butler, writes on the subject: "Five months after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, thrice repeating his name. In consequence of his recommendation, the bishops of all Egypt assembled at Alexandria, and finding the people and clergy unanimous in their choice of Athanasius for patriarch, they confirmed the election about the middle of year 326. He seems, then, to have been about thirty years of age. "

Answer: thrice repeating his name

<hl> Alban Butler, writes on the subject: "Five months after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, thrice repeating his name . <hl> In consequence of his recommendation, the bishops of all Egypt assembled at Alexandria, and finding the people and clergy unanimous in their choice of Athanasius for patriarch, they confirmed the election about the middle of year 326. He seems, then, to have been about thirty years of age. "

Alban Butler, writes on the subject: "Five months after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, <hl> thrice repeating his name <hl>. In consequence of his recommendation, the bishops of all Egypt assembled at Alexandria, and finding the people and clergy unanimous in their choice of Athanasius for patriarch, they confirmed the election about the middle of year 326. He seems, then, to have been about thirty years of age. "

Alban Butler, writes on the subject: "Five months after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, <hl> thrice repeating his name <hl> .


Question: How old was Athanasius when he was chosen as Patriarch?

Answer: thirty years

Alban Butler, writes on the subject: "Five months after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, thrice repeating his name. In consequence of his recommendation, the bishops of all Egypt assembled at Alexandria, and finding the people and clergy unanimous in their choice of Athanasius for patriarch, they confirmed the election about the middle of year 326. <hl> He seems, then, to have been about thirty years of age. <hl> "

Alban Butler, writes on the subject: "Five months after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, thrice repeating his name. In consequence of his recommendation, the bishops of all Egypt assembled at Alexandria, and finding the people and clergy unanimous in their choice of Athanasius for patriarch, they confirmed the election about the middle of year 326. He seems, then, to have been about <hl> thirty years <hl> of age. "


Question: Who came to Alexandria to confirm the choice?

Answer: bishops of all Egypt

Alban Butler, writes on the subject: "Five months after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, thrice repeating his name. <hl> In consequence of his recommendation, the bishops of all Egypt assembled at Alexandria, and finding the people and clergy unanimous in their choice of Athanasius for patriarch, they confirmed the election about the middle of year 326. <hl> He seems, then, to have been about thirty years of age. "

Alban Butler, writes on the subject: "Five months after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, thrice repeating his name. In consequence of his recommendation, the <hl> bishops of all Egypt <hl> assembled at Alexandria, and finding the people and clergy unanimous in their choice of Athanasius for patriarch, they confirmed the election about the middle of year 326. He seems, then, to have been about thirty years of age. "


Question: Did all the people want him as Patriarch?

Answer: unanimous in their choice

Alban Butler, writes on the subject: "Five months after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, thrice repeating his name. <hl> In consequence of his recommendation, the bishops of all Egypt assembled at Alexandria, and finding the people and clergy unanimous in their choice of Athanasius for patriarch <hl> , they confirmed the election about the middle of year 326. He seems, then, to have been about thirty years of age. "

Alban Butler, writes on the subject: "Five months after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, thrice repeating his name. In consequence of his recommendation, the bishops of all Egypt assembled at Alexandria, and finding the people and clergy <hl> unanimous in their choice <hl> of Athanasius for patriarch, they confirmed the election about the middle of year 326. He seems, then, to have been about thirty years of age. "


Question: How long after the Council of Nicae did Alexander die?

Answer: Five months

<hl> Alban Butler, writes on the subject: " Five months after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, thrice repeating his name. <hl> In consequence of his recommendation, the bishops of all Egypt assembled at Alexandria, and finding the people and clergy unanimous in their choice of Athanasius for patriarch, they confirmed the election about the middle of year 326. He seems, then, to have been about thirty years of age. "

Alban Butler, writes on the subject: "<hl> Five months <hl> after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, thrice repeating his name. In consequence of his recommendation, the bishops of all Egypt assembled at Alexandria, and finding the people and clergy unanimous in their choice of Athanasius for patriarch, they confirmed the election about the middle of year 326. He seems, then, to have been about thirty years of age. "

Alban Butler, writes on the subject: " <hl> Five months <hl> after this great Council, Nicae, St Alexander lying on his death-bed, recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his successor, thrice repeating his name.


Question: Which of the Gospels most agrees with Athanasius?

The Gospel of John and particularly the first chapter demonstrates the Divinity of Jesus. This Gospel in itself is the greatest support of Athanasius's stand. The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as a result of Athanasius, and his life's stand, but quietly. The Last Gospel of The Mass, The Eucharist, St John[1:1–14], together with the prayer; "Placeat tibi", the Blessing, are all private devotions that have been gradually absorbed by the liturgical service. The beginning of John's Gospel was much used as an object of special devotion throughout the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, the practice of saying it at the altar grew; eventually Pius V made this practice universal for the Roman Rite in his edition of the Missal (1570). It became a firm custom with exceptions in using an other Gospel in use from 1920. So the Missals showed different last Gospel for certain Feast days. A Prayer Card for the St John's Gospel. Also:

Answer: Gospel of John

<hl> The Gospel of John and particularly the first chapter demonstrates the Divinity of Jesus. <hl> This Gospel in itself is the greatest support of Athanasius's stand. The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as a result of Athanasius, and his life's stand, but quietly. The Last Gospel of The Mass, The Eucharist, St John[1:1–14], together with the prayer; "Placeat tibi", the Blessing, are all private devotions that have been gradually absorbed by the liturgical service. The beginning of John's Gospel was much used as an object of special devotion throughout the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, the practice of saying it at the altar grew; eventually Pius V made this practice universal for the Roman Rite in his edition of the Missal (1570). It became a firm custom with exceptions in using an other Gospel in use from 1920. So the Missals showed different last Gospel for certain Feast days. A Prayer Card for the St John's Gospel. Also:

The <hl> Gospel of John <hl> and particularly the first chapter demonstrates the Divinity of Jesus. This Gospel in itself is the greatest support of Athanasius's stand. The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as a result of Athanasius, and his life's stand, but quietly. The Last Gospel of The Mass, The Eucharist, St John[1:1–14], together with the prayer; "Placeat tibi", the Blessing, are all private devotions that have been gradually absorbed by the liturgical service. The beginning of John's Gospel was much used as an object of special devotion throughout the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, the practice of saying it at the altar grew; eventually Pius V made this practice universal for the Roman Rite in his edition of the Missal (1570). It became a firm custom with exceptions in using an other Gospel in use from 1920. So the Missals showed different last Gospel for certain Feast days. A Prayer Card for the St John's Gospel. Also:


Question: What does this Gospel show that Athanasius also believed?

Answer: the Divinity of Jesus

<hl> The Gospel of John and particularly the first chapter demonstrates the Divinity of Jesus . <hl> This Gospel in itself is the greatest support of Athanasius's stand. The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as a result of Athanasius, and his life's stand, but quietly. The Last Gospel of The Mass, The Eucharist, St John[1:1–14], together with the prayer; "Placeat tibi", the Blessing, are all private devotions that have been gradually absorbed by the liturgical service. The beginning of John's Gospel was much used as an object of special devotion throughout the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, the practice of saying it at the altar grew; eventually Pius V made this practice universal for the Roman Rite in his edition of the Missal (1570). It became a firm custom with exceptions in using an other Gospel in use from 1920. So the Missals showed different last Gospel for certain Feast days. A Prayer Card for the St John's Gospel. Also:

The Gospel of John and particularly the first chapter demonstrates <hl> the Divinity of Jesus <hl>. This Gospel in itself is the greatest support of Athanasius's stand. The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as a result of Athanasius, and his life's stand, but quietly. The Last Gospel of The Mass, The Eucharist, St John[1:1–14], together with the prayer; "Placeat tibi", the Blessing, are all private devotions that have been gradually absorbed by the liturgical service. The beginning of John's Gospel was much used as an object of special devotion throughout the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, the practice of saying it at the altar grew; eventually Pius V made this practice universal for the Roman Rite in his edition of the Missal (1570). It became a firm custom with exceptions in using an other Gospel in use from 1920. So the Missals showed different last Gospel for certain Feast days. A Prayer Card for the St John's Gospel. Also:

The Gospel of John and particularly the first chapter demonstrates <hl> the Divinity of Jesus <hl> .


Question: Why is the Gospel of John said at the end of Catholic Mass?

Answer: a result of Athanasius

The Gospel of John and particularly the first chapter demonstrates the Divinity of Jesus. This Gospel in itself is the greatest support of Athanasius's stand. <hl> The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as a result of Athanasius , and his life's stand, but quietly. <hl> The Last Gospel of The Mass, The Eucharist, St John[1:1–14], together with the prayer; "Placeat tibi", the Blessing, are all private devotions that have been gradually absorbed by the liturgical service. The beginning of John's Gospel was much used as an object of special devotion throughout the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, the practice of saying it at the altar grew; eventually Pius V made this practice universal for the Roman Rite in his edition of the Missal (1570). It became a firm custom with exceptions in using an other Gospel in use from 1920. So the Missals showed different last Gospel for certain Feast days. A Prayer Card for the St John's Gospel. Also:

The Gospel of John and particularly the first chapter demonstrates the Divinity of Jesus. This Gospel in itself is the greatest support of Athanasius's stand. The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as <hl> a result of Athanasius <hl>, and his life's stand, but quietly. The Last Gospel of The Mass, The Eucharist, St John[1:1–14], together with the prayer; "Placeat tibi", the Blessing, are all private devotions that have been gradually absorbed by the liturgical service. The beginning of John's Gospel was much used as an object of special devotion throughout the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, the practice of saying it at the altar grew; eventually Pius V made this practice universal for the Roman Rite in his edition of the Missal (1570). It became a firm custom with exceptions in using an other Gospel in use from 1920. So the Missals showed different last Gospel for certain Feast days. A Prayer Card for the St John's Gospel. Also:

The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as <hl> a result of Athanasius <hl> , and his life's stand, but quietly.


Question: Where was this Gospel said?

Answer: at the altar

The Gospel of John and particularly the first chapter demonstrates the Divinity of Jesus. This Gospel in itself is the greatest support of Athanasius's stand. The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as a result of Athanasius, and his life's stand, but quietly. The Last Gospel of The Mass, The Eucharist, St John[1:1–14], together with the prayer; "Placeat tibi", the Blessing, are all private devotions that have been gradually absorbed by the liturgical service. The beginning of John's Gospel was much used as an object of special devotion throughout the Middle Ages. <hl> Nevertheless, the practice of saying it at the altar grew; eventually Pius V made this practice universal for the Roman Rite in his edition of the Missal (1570). <hl> It became a firm custom with exceptions in using an other Gospel in use from 1920. So the Missals showed different last Gospel for certain Feast days. A Prayer Card for the St John's Gospel. Also:

The Gospel of John and particularly the first chapter demonstrates the Divinity of Jesus. This Gospel in itself is the greatest support of Athanasius's stand. The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as a result of Athanasius, and his life's stand, but quietly. The Last Gospel of The Mass, The Eucharist, St John[1:1–14], together with the prayer; "Placeat tibi", the Blessing, are all private devotions that have been gradually absorbed by the liturgical service. The beginning of John's Gospel was much used as an object of special devotion throughout the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, the practice of saying it <hl> at the altar <hl> grew; eventually Pius V made this practice universal for the Roman Rite in his edition of the Missal (1570). It became a firm custom with exceptions in using an other Gospel in use from 1920. So the Missals showed different last Gospel for certain Feast days. A Prayer Card for the St John's Gospel. Also:


Question: When are different Gospels said?

Answer: certain Feast days

The Gospel of John and particularly the first chapter demonstrates the Divinity of Jesus. This Gospel in itself is the greatest support of Athanasius's stand. The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as a result of Athanasius, and his life's stand, but quietly. The Last Gospel of The Mass, The Eucharist, St John[1:1–14], together with the prayer; "Placeat tibi", the Blessing, are all private devotions that have been gradually absorbed by the liturgical service. The beginning of John's Gospel was much used as an object of special devotion throughout the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, the practice of saying it at the altar grew; eventually Pius V made this practice universal for the Roman Rite in his edition of the Missal (1570). It became a firm custom with exceptions in using an other Gospel in use from 1920. <hl> So the Missals showed different last Gospel for certain Feast days . <hl> A Prayer Card for the St John's Gospel. Also:

The Gospel of John and particularly the first chapter demonstrates the Divinity of Jesus. This Gospel in itself is the greatest support of Athanasius's stand. The Gospel of John's first chapter began to be said at the end of Mass, we believe as a result of Athanasius, and his life's stand, but quietly. The Last Gospel of The Mass, The Eucharist, St John[1:1–14], together with the prayer; "Placeat tibi", the Blessing, are all private devotions that have been gradually absorbed by the liturgical service. The beginning of John's Gospel was much used as an object of special devotion throughout the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, the practice of saying it at the altar grew; eventually Pius V made this practice universal for the Roman Rite in his edition of the Missal (1570). It became a firm custom with exceptions in using an other Gospel in use from 1920. So the Missals showed different last Gospel for <hl> certain Feast days <hl>. A Prayer Card for the St John's Gospel. Also:

So the Missals showed different last Gospel for <hl> certain Feast days <hl> .


Question: Did all Arians believe the same things?

Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was not monolithic, but held drastically different theological views that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum. They supported the tenets of Origenist thought and theology, but had little else in common. Moreover, many labelled "Arian" did not consider themselves followers of Arius. In addition, non-Homoousian bishops disagreed with being labeled as followers of Arius, since Arius was merely a presbyter, while they were fully ordained bishops. However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was a real theological ideology.[citation needed]

Answer: different theological views

<hl> Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was not monolithic, but held drastically different theological views that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum. <hl> They supported the tenets of Origenist thought and theology, but had little else in common. Moreover, many labelled "Arian" did not consider themselves followers of Arius. In addition, non-Homoousian bishops disagreed with being labeled as followers of Arius, since Arius was merely a presbyter, while they were fully ordained bishops. However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was a real theological ideology.[citation needed]

Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was not monolithic, but held drastically <hl> different theological views <hl> that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum. They supported the tenets of Origenist thought and theology, but had little else in common. Moreover, many labelled "Arian" did not consider themselves followers of Arius. In addition, non-Homoousian bishops disagreed with being labeled as followers of Arius, since Arius was merely a presbyter, while they were fully ordained bishops. However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was a real theological ideology.[citation needed]


Question: Were Arians also Origenists?

Answer: supported the tenets

Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was not monolithic, but held drastically different theological views that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum. <hl> They supported the tenets of Origenist thought and theology, but had little else in common. <hl> Moreover, many labelled "Arian" did not consider themselves followers of Arius. In addition, non-Homoousian bishops disagreed with being labeled as followers of Arius, since Arius was merely a presbyter, while they were fully ordained bishops. However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was a real theological ideology.[citation needed]

Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was not monolithic, but held drastically different theological views that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum. They <hl> supported the tenets <hl> of Origenist thought and theology, but had little else in common. Moreover, many labelled "Arian" did not consider themselves followers of Arius. In addition, non-Homoousian bishops disagreed with being labeled as followers of Arius, since Arius was merely a presbyter, while they were fully ordained bishops. However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was a real theological ideology.[citation needed]


Question: Did the bishops consider themselves Arians?

Answer: bishops disagreed

Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was not monolithic, but held drastically different theological views that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum. They supported the tenets of Origenist thought and theology, but had little else in common. Moreover, many labelled "Arian" did not consider themselves followers of Arius. <hl> In addition, non-Homoousian bishops disagreed with being labeled as followers of Arius, since Arius was merely a presbyter, while they were fully ordained bishops. <hl> However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was a real theological ideology.[citation needed]

Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was not monolithic, but held drastically different theological views that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum. They supported the tenets of Origenist thought and theology, but had little else in common. Moreover, many labelled "Arian" did not consider themselves followers of Arius. In addition, non-Homoousian <hl> bishops disagreed <hl> with being labeled as followers of Arius, since Arius was merely a presbyter, while they were fully ordained bishops. However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was a real theological ideology.[citation needed]


Question: What did the Council of Nicaea decide about Arianism?

Answer: a real theological ideology

Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was not monolithic, but held drastically different theological views that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum. They supported the tenets of Origenist thought and theology, but had little else in common. Moreover, many labelled "Arian" did not consider themselves followers of Arius. In addition, non-Homoousian bishops disagreed with being labeled as followers of Arius, since Arius was merely a presbyter, while they were fully ordained bishops. <hl> However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was a real theological ideology .[citation needed] <hl>

Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was not monolithic, but held drastically different theological views that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum. They supported the tenets of Origenist thought and theology, but had little else in common. Moreover, many labelled "Arian" did not consider themselves followers of Arius. In addition, non-Homoousian bishops disagreed with being labeled as followers of Arius, since Arius was merely a presbyter, while they were fully ordained bishops. However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was <hl> a real theological ideology <hl>.[citation needed]

However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was <hl> a real theological ideology <hl> .[citation needed]


Question: Did Arians have one set of beliefs?

Answer: not monolithic

<hl> Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was not monolithic , but held drastically different theological views that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum. <hl> They supported the tenets of Origenist thought and theology, but had little else in common. Moreover, many labelled "Arian" did not consider themselves followers of Arius. In addition, non-Homoousian bishops disagreed with being labeled as followers of Arius, since Arius was merely a presbyter, while they were fully ordained bishops. However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was a real theological ideology.[citation needed]

Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was <hl> not monolithic <hl>, but held drastically different theological views that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum. They supported the tenets of Origenist thought and theology, but had little else in common. Moreover, many labelled "Arian" did not consider themselves followers of Arius. In addition, non-Homoousian bishops disagreed with being labeled as followers of Arius, since Arius was merely a presbyter, while they were fully ordained bishops. However, others point to the Council of Nicaea as proof in and of itself that Arianism was a real theological ideology.[citation needed]

Scholars now believe that the Arian Party was <hl> not monolithic <hl> , but held drastically different theological views that spanned the early Christian theological spectrum.


Question: To what golden event was Seattle the portal?

Logging was Seattle's first major industry, but by the late 19th century the city had become a commercial and shipbuilding center as a gateway to Alaska during the Klondike Gold Rush. By 1910, Seattle was one of the 25 largest cities in the country. However, the Great Depression severely damaged the city's economy. Growth returned during and after World War II, due partially to the local Boeing company, which established Seattle as a center for aircraft manufacturing. The Seattle area developed as a technology center beginning in the 1980s, with companies like Microsoft becoming established in the region. In 1994 the Internet retail giant Amazon was founded in Seattle. The stream of new software, biotechnology, and Internet companies led to an economic revival, which increased the city's population by almost 50,000 between 1990 and 2000.

Answer: Klondike Gold Rush

<hl> Logging was Seattle's first major industry, but by the late 19th century the city had become a commercial and shipbuilding center as a gateway to Alaska during the Klondike Gold Rush . <hl> By 1910, Seattle was one of the 25 largest cities in the country. However, the Great Depression severely damaged the city's economy. Growth returned during and after World War II, due partially to the local Boeing company, which established Seattle as a center for aircraft manufacturing. The Seattle area developed as a technology center beginning in the 1980s, with companies like Microsoft becoming established in the region. In 1994 the Internet retail giant Amazon was founded in Seattle. The stream of new software, biotechnology, and Internet companies led to an economic revival, which increased the city's population by almost 50,000 between 1990 and 2000.

Logging was Seattle's first major industry, but by the late 19th century the city had become a commercial and shipbuilding center as a gateway to Alaska during the <hl> Klondike Gold Rush <hl>. By 1910, Seattle was one of the 25 largest cities in the country. However, the Great Depression severely damaged the city's economy. Growth returned during and after World War II, due partially to the local Boeing company, which established Seattle as a center for aircraft manufacturing. The Seattle area developed as a technology center beginning in the 1980s, with companies like Microsoft becoming established in the region. In 1994 the Internet retail giant Amazon was founded in Seattle. The stream of new software, biotechnology, and Internet companies led to an economic revival, which increased the city's population by almost 50,000 between 1990 and 2000.

Logging was Seattle's first major industry, but by the late 19th century the city had become a commercial and shipbuilding center as a gateway to Alaska during the <hl> Klondike Gold Rush <hl> .


Question: Which large technology giant established its home base in Seattle?

Answer: Microsoft

Logging was Seattle's first major industry, but by the late 19th century the city had become a commercial and shipbuilding center as a gateway to Alaska during the Klondike Gold Rush. By 1910, Seattle was one of the 25 largest cities in the country. However, the Great Depression severely damaged the city's economy. Growth returned during and after World War II, due partially to the local Boeing company, which established Seattle as a center for aircraft manufacturing. <hl> The Seattle area developed as a technology center beginning in the 1980s, with companies like Microsoft becoming established in the region. <hl> In 1994 the Internet retail giant Amazon was founded in Seattle. The stream of new software, biotechnology, and Internet companies led to an economic revival, which increased the city's population by almost 50,000 between 1990 and 2000.

Logging was Seattle's first major industry, but by the late 19th century the city had become a commercial and shipbuilding center as a gateway to Alaska during the Klondike Gold Rush. By 1910, Seattle was one of the 25 largest cities in the country. However, the Great Depression severely damaged the city's economy. Growth returned during and after World War II, due partially to the local Boeing company, which established Seattle as a center for aircraft manufacturing. The Seattle area developed as a technology center beginning in the 1980s, with companies like <hl> Microsoft <hl> becoming established in the region. In 1994 the Internet retail giant Amazon was founded in Seattle. The stream of new software, biotechnology, and Internet companies led to an economic revival, which increased the city's population by almost 50,000 between 1990 and 2000.


Question: In what area was the Klondike Gold Rush located?

Answer: Alaska

<hl> Logging was Seattle's first major industry, but by the late 19th century the city had become a commercial and shipbuilding center as a gateway to Alaska during the Klondike Gold Rush. <hl> By 1910, Seattle was one of the 25 largest cities in the country. However, the Great Depression severely damaged the city's economy. Growth returned during and after World War II, due partially to the local Boeing company, which established Seattle as a center for aircraft manufacturing. The Seattle area developed as a technology center beginning in the 1980s, with companies like Microsoft becoming established in the region. In 1994 the Internet retail giant Amazon was founded in Seattle. The stream of new software, biotechnology, and Internet companies led to an economic revival, which increased the city's population by almost 50,000 between 1990 and 2000.

Logging was Seattle's first major industry, but by the late 19th century the city had become a commercial and shipbuilding center as a gateway to <hl> Alaska <hl> during the Klondike Gold Rush. By 1910, Seattle was one of the 25 largest cities in the country. However, the Great Depression severely damaged the city's economy. Growth returned during and after World War II, due partially to the local Boeing company, which established Seattle as a center for aircraft manufacturing. The Seattle area developed as a technology center beginning in the 1980s, with companies like Microsoft becoming established in the region. In 1994 the Internet retail giant Amazon was founded in Seattle. The stream of new software, biotechnology, and Internet companies led to an economic revival, which increased the city's population by almost 50,000 between 1990 and 2000.