A friend of mine called me up during the week. He was coming to Calgary for a conference and his accommodation plans fell through so he asked if he could stay in my spare bedroom. His plans were to arrive Thursday evening and leave Sunday morning. That gave us three evenings together.
On Thursday evening we watched the movie Midway. I had already seen the movie but brought up the idea because he loves military history and hadn’t seen it. I also wanted to see the movie again so that was a good excuse. I fully recommend this movie.
The second evening was political discussions. We talked about a lot of contemporary political situations. They included federal and provincial and international issues such as the Arab-Israeli conflict. I thought that the third night would be another night of politics but it wasn’t the case. He wanted to debate religion which I was 100% okay with. He’s an ex-Catholic turned Protestant though he’s not of the James White sort. He’s not viciously anti-Catholic and he always makes for a good discussion since he’s a master of logic so I was more than happy to debate him.
We started out with papal authority and branched out from there. We talked about certain events in the early church involving the bishop of Rome. Eventually we branched out to authority in general. The last hour of our discussion revolved around a handful of questions that I asked him. I’ll ask them here for anyone who wants to answer.
Was Arius a true believer?
Was St. Athanasius of Alexandria a true believer?
Was John Calvin a true believer?
Was St. Robert Bellarmine a true believer?
Now, obviously I know people can’t look into the hearts and souls of these people. I just ask that they take their best guess based off the information available.
The reason that I ask these questions are to do with standards and authority. Most Protestants don’t believe one has to hold a specific set of beliefs to be a true believer. One example is eternal security. The vast majority of Protestants wouldn’t exclude other Protestants for believing in the opposite of what they believe.
Most Protestants would say(including my friend last night) that being a true believer is more about connecting with and knowing God rather than checking off items on a theological checklist. An admirable position but I always liked to throw Arius into the mix. Did Arius love and know Christ? He would certainly have said that he did.
Arius shows us that the theological checklist can’t simply be ignored. Now, he collapsed on the issues of Christology but is that the only important topic? What about soteriology and the doctrines of grace? What about doctrines involving baptism or the eucharist?
So I ask my Protestant readers to answer those questions. I’m interested in the answers and hearing the standards for each of them. Catholics can answer them if they want but I think it’ll be a pretty clear answer.
Dear Mr Ruhl
May i commend you for reaching out to our protestant brethren. I am currently writing an essay on Arian Theology and it is terribly confusing. Many modern day theological writers seem to delight to attacking St Athanasius the Apostolic while exonerating a man whom the Greek Church refer to as “The first to fight against God, and the leader of every heresy”. Out of curiosity, why do believe that Arius was and is so controversial a theologian ?
Yours in Christ
Tobias Bellhouse
I mean, his theology was condemned by an ecumenical council. That’s pretty bad.
So was Theodore of Mopsuesta, but he did NOT teach what he was accused of, Arius did. If Theodore was a Heretic then so am I.
You are a “true believer” if you confess Jesus was Christ and the Son of God, no matter what else you are wrong on. Passages like 1 John 4 make that clear.
So I don’t think you can get more theologically wrong then Calvin and Augustine, but I still call them fellow Believers.