Swords from Without, Cracks from Within
Part 3 in The War Unseen: The Long Battle Against Christ and His Church
This article is Part 3 in a series. Be sure to start with Part 1!
This article is Part 3 in a series. After Part 1, be sure to read Part 2!
Author's Note: What follows is a personal hypothesis. While I am a devoted member of the Orthodox Church, this work does not reflect the official position of the Orthodox Church nor does it speak on behalf of it.
Rather, it represents my own synthesis and reflection on the long historical arc of spiritual warfare I believe has been waged against God, Christ, and His Church from the moment of the Incarnation until now. Ideas and concepts articulated within this article come from my own understanding of early church and reformation history, orthodox and roman catholic podcasts and some evangelical sources. (Where these types of views tend to be the most prevalent.)
WARNING: This article contains graphic depictions of the Roman persecutions of Christians. Reader discretion is advised.
The midday sun beats down on the stone of a Roman amphitheater nestled in the greenery of Roman Gaul. The harsh light glints off the polished helmets of the guards and the sweat-slicked faces of the jeering crowd. A thousand voices in a single monstrous roar reverberate through the open air; a terrible sound filled with bestial bloodlust and demented celebratory glee.
Your hands are bound, the rough rope biting into your wrists. Around you are your brothers and sisters in Christ, a trembling flock amidst a sea of ravenous wolves. Young children clutch their mothers’ legs, wide-eyed with terror, some screaming as gangs of men repeatedly take turns ravaging their mothers, others watch silently in horror, too afraid to cry, silent tears drying on their cheeks. The smell of dust, sweat, excrement, and the copper tang of blood hang heavy in the muggy heat.
A chilling cry erupts from the crowd as the gates at the other end of the arena groan open. A lion pads out onto the sand, mane a halo of gold and rust. But its attention is not on you. It fixes on Bishop Pothinus — frail, 90 years old, carried forward by soldiers more than walking under his own strength. He is bent and battered, broken bones jut out and stretch the skin of his body at odd angles, broken by days of abuse.
Only two days ago, he stood before the governor who demanded to know the name of the God of the Christians. “If you are worthy,” he said, “you shall know.” For that defiance, he was dragged through the streets, beaten with fists, feet, clubs, and whatever objects the mob could seize. His ribs protrude at grotesque angles, purple bruises blossom over his face, and he breathes shallowly. Now they strip him of his robes, leaving him in a simple tunic, and thrust him forward again. The crowd howls as soldiers strike him with blunt clubs, the thuds and crunching of bone audible even over the roar. He collapses in the sand, blood pooling around him, too near death for the beasts to bother with. To the pagans, it is a spectacle. To the Bishop, it is a crown.
Then your eyes fall upon Blandina — a slave girl, slight, fragile, seemingly the weakest among you. And yet, she has endured more than any. From the first day of questioning, you watched from your cell as they tortured her relentlessly, determined to break her. They scourged her until flesh hung in loose ribbons from her back. They burned her with hot irons, repeatedly branding her with the names of false gods until every bit of her skin was scarred. They suspended her on a stake in the form of a cross, exposed to wild beasts. To everyone’s astonishment, she endured everything without a cry of despair. Her confession never changed: “I am a Christian, and nothing wicked is done among us.”
Now they bring her forth again. The guards drive her toward a massive bull. The beast charges, tossing her into the air again and again, her body thudding against the sand. And yet she rises, bloodied but radiant, her lips moving in prayer. The crowd is in awe — not of her God, but of her impossible endurance. To you, she is living proof that Christ dwells in the weakest vessel, making it unbreakable.
One by one, others are brought forward. A guard holds out a brazier of burning coals. “Burn a pinch of incense to the gods,” he sneers, “and live.”
Marcus, a stonemason with hands calloused from years of work, looks at the coals, then at his wife, and finally to heaven. He shakes his head. The guard plunges a dagger into his chest. Thomas, an old baker, follows him, refusing, and the blade finds his heart. Women are scourged and ravaged unto death, children are threatened, the elderly mocked and beaten — but all hold firm.
The amphitheater becomes a theater of satanic cruelty. Wild beasts maul, soldiers rape and stab, and fire consumes. The crowd’s roar is a symphony of hate, each cheer a hammer blow against your soul. And yet, as you watch, you begin to see something else: a strange reversal. For the martyrs are not victims but victors. Their deaths are not defeats but testimonies. Their broken bodies are not waste but seeds that will sprout forth in the hearts and minds of those who come after.
You know your time is coming. Your hands are still bound, but your will is not. Your body is weak, but your faith burns like fire. You will not falter. You will not give in. Your life is not your own. It belongs to Christ. You will meet the lion, the sword, the scourge, or whatever they devise, with your head held high, for you are not alone. Pothinus and Blandina, Marcus and Thomas, your brothers and sisters already slain, surround you like a great cloud of witnesses.
You close your eyes and pray, not for deliverance, but for strength to endure it well. You are ready, for it is not you who lives, but Christ God who lives within you.
Welcome to the world of the early Church. 1
When the devil’s pagan counterfeits not only failed to prevent the rapid spread of the Gospel but began to collapse, the demons shifted tactics. The first was violence: direct persecution, designed to terrify Christians into apostasy. The second was infiltration: heresies to corrupt the faith from the inside and then grow to attack it from without. Both strategies appeared early on, and both were deadly. Both still exist in the devil’s playbook and are constantly employed today.
Beyond the Paywall
We cover the periods of Christian persecutions as well as the stories of brave martyrs and how they stood true in their faith despite persecution.
How the church grew stronger and emerged from the persecutions to triumph over paganism.
The major heresies of the first millennium, how the devil attempted to use them to undermine the church, and how echoes of them persist today.
I. The Persecutions: Swords from Without
Persecution in the Roman Empire was not constant; it came in waves. But it was always designed to preserve the pagan system of sacrifices, oracles, and their (demonic) gods by making Christians appear as dangerous traitors to Rome’s social and spiritual fabric. Below is a timeline of notable periods of persecution in church history.
Nero (54–68 AD)
Blamed Christians for the Great Fire of Rome (64 AD). Many historians suspect that the Great Fire may have been started on Nero’s orders. Rome was crowded, its layout chaotic, and much of it was built out of flammable wood. Nero dreamed of rebuilding it in a grand style that required many of the existing buildings to be cleared first. After the fire, he constructed his enormous Domus Aurea (“Golden House”) palace.
To deflect suspicion, Nero blamed the Christians, subjecting them to horrific tortures — crucifixions, wild beasts, and being burned alive as human torches in his gardens. This is recorded by the historian Tacitus.
Tacitus records that eventually the public began to pity them, not because they believed them innocent, but because the cruelty was so extreme.
Domitian (81–96 AD)
Persecution of those who refused to worship the emperor as the son of a God.
Most emperors before Domitian were cautious about explicitly demanding divine worship while alive, especially in Rome itself. Domitian broke that restraint. Court poets, officials, and petitioners were expected to call him by this title. He had it stamped on inscriptions and insisted it be used in official correspondence.
Ancient sources (like Suetonius, Life of Domitian, ch. 13) tell us he insisted on being addressed as “Dominus et Deus noster” — “our Lord and God.”
His persecution targeted Christians in the upper classes, including Flavius Clemens, a consul executed for “atheism.”
For Christians, confessing “Jesus is Lord” (Kyrios Iēsous) was a central proclamation (Romans 10:9). To call Domitian “Lord and God” directly conflicted with that confession.
Refusal to use the title he created for himself was seen as treasonous. Ironically, Christians were accused of being atheists because they refused to worship the Emperor and the Roman pagan Gods.
This is one of the reasons Domitian’s reign is remembered as a time of persecution, particularly against high-ranking Romans who had converted.
In Revelation (traditionally dated around Domitian’s reign), Thomas confesses Christ as “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28) — the same words Domitian claimed for himself. The Book of Revelation’s image of the beast demanding worship and blasphemous titles fits eerily well with Domitian’s cult of dominus et deus.
Trajan & Pliny (98–138)
Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus, known to us as Pliny the Younger (61–c.113 AD) was a Roman senator, lawyer, and governor. He is known for his Letters (Epistulae), a rich collection of personal and official correspondence that gives us a window into Roman life under the emperors.
Around 111–113 AD, Pliny was appointed governor (legatus Augusti) of Bithynia-Pontus (in modern Turkey). While there, he encountered growing numbers of Christians and didn’t know how to handle them legally. Pliny wasn’t sure whether merely being a Christian was punishable or only specific crimes. He wrote to Emperor Trajan, asking for instructions. This is preserved as Letter 10.96–97 in his Letters.
Trajan responded to Pliny: “Do not hunt them down. If accused and proven guilty, punish them—but if they deny and sacrifice to the gods, pardon them.”
This created a legal precedent. Refusal to sacrifice became a punishable crime.
He interrogated accused Christians. If they refused to renounce Christ, he ordered them executed (Roman citizens were beheaded; others could be executed more harshly). If they denied Christ, cursed His name, and offered incense and wine to the emperor’s image, he released them.
Pliny’s letter is one of the earliest non-Christian descriptions of Christian worship.
His Observations about Christians:
They met “on a fixed day before dawn” (likely Sunday).
They sang hymns “to Christ as to a god.”
They bound themselves by oath not to commit crimes, but to live morally.
They shared ordinary food together (probably the Eucharist, though Pliny doesn’t recognize it as such).
Marcus Aurelius (161–180)
Stoic philosopher emperor. Saw Christians as obstinate fanatics who were disrupting civic harmony.
The martyrs of Lyon (177) and Polycarp of Smyrna (155) suffered under his reign.
These two martyrdom accounts are among the best-attested we have from the second century, and both fall under the reign of Marcus Aurelius (161–180 AD). They are very different in tone: Polycarp, the aged bishop who goes to his death calmly, and the martyrs of Lyon, who endure grotesque brutality in the arena.
Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 155 AD) was the Bishop of Smyrna (in Asia Minor, modern Izmir, Turkey). He was also a direct and personal disciple of St. John the Apostle. Polycarp was one of the last living links to the apostolic age. He was widely respected across the Church; even Irenaeus of Lyon had sat under him in his youth.
During a local persecution in Smyrna, Christians were being arrested and executed. Polycarp initially withdrew at the urging of his flock, but eventually accepted capture, saying: “The will of God be done.” Brought before the proconsul in the stadium, he was pressed to swear by Caesar and curse Christ. Instead, Polycarp replied: “Eighty-six years I have served Him, and He has done me no wrong. How then can I blaspheme my King and Savior?” (Martyrdom of Polycarp, 9). For his reply, he was sentenced to be burned alive. The crowds gathered wood; he was bound, not nailed, to the stake. Eyewitnesses record that when the fire was lit, the flames billowed around him like a sail, but did not consume his body. He was seen glowing like gold in a furnace, and his flesh gave off a fragrant smell “like bread baking or incense.” Finally, an executioner stabbed him, and so much blood gushed out that it quenched the fire.
“Now the blessed Polycarp was martyred on the second day of the first part of the month Xanthicus, the seventh day before the Kalends of March, on a great Sabbath, at the eighth hour. He was apprehended by Herod, in the high priest’s quarter, and brought to the tribunal where Herod sat, with Nicetes, his father. And he was conducted into the stadium, where a great tumult was excited, as if he had been some great malefactor. Now there was a loud cry from heaven, saying: ‘Be strong, and play the man, O Polycarp!’ And no one saw the speaker, but the voice was heard by those of our people who were there. And when he was brought forward, there was a great tumult, and many heard a voice from heaven, saying, ‘Be strong, Polycarp, and play the man.’ And when he was asked if he was Polycarp, he confessed that he was. Then they tried to persuade him to deny Christ, saying, ‘Swear by the fortune of Caesar; repent, and say, Away with the atheists.’ But Polycarp, gazing with a stern countenance on all the multitude of the wicked heathens in the stadium, and waving his hand toward them, while with groans he looked up to heaven, said, ‘Away with the atheists!’ Then the proconsul urged him, saying, ‘Swear, and I will set you free; revile Christ.’ Polycarp declared, ‘Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me any injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and my Savior?’”
(Mart. Polycarp 9–10)
The Martyrs of Lyon and Vienne (177 AD) (as described in the opening narrative). This took place in Lugdunum (modern Lyon, France) and nearby Vienne. Recorded in a long letter from the Churches of Lyon and Vienne to the Churches of Asia Minor, preserved by Eusebius of Caesarea (Ecclesiastical History, Book V, chs. 1–3). Christians in Gaul were a minority community, suspected of “atheism” (for denying the gods), cannibalism (misunderstanding the Eucharist), and incest (misreading their “love feasts” and language of brother/sisterhood). The persecution began with mob violence: Christians were excluded from baths, markets, and public places. Arrests followed, and the accused were brought before Roman officials. The letter describes horrific brutality:
Christians were beaten, dragged through the streets, and thrown into dark, airless dungeons where many suffocated.
Examinations Under Torture — some recanted, others held fast. Those who stood firm inspired the wavering.
Bishop Pothinus
Ninety years old, frail, was the first bishop of Lyon. Ponthius was brought before the governor and asked who the God of the Christians was. He answered: “If thou be worthy, thou shalt know.” He was beaten with fists, feet, clubs, and stones by the mob. He was then thrown into prison, where he died two days later from his injuries.
Blandina (the slave girl) was physically frail, yet she endured the worst tortures. She was whipped, scourged, and burned with hot irons. She was hung on a stake in the arena in the shape of a cross, and exposed to wild beasts. She was thrown to wild animals and to a bull that tossed her repeatedly. After repeated torments over several days, she was finally executed by the sword. Her repeated confession was not to recant her testimony of Christ but to confirm: “I am a Christian, and nothing wicked is done among us.”
Attalus of Pergamum, a prominent and well-known Christian, was demanded by the crowd. He was very wealthy, highly respected, and very visibly Christian. He was very well educated and was an outspoken defender of the faith, and those opposed to the Christians wanted to make an example out of him. He was displayed in the amphitheater with a placard: “This is Attalus the Christian.” He was then roasted alive on an iron chair until his flesh burned.
Maturus, Sanctus, and Others - Sanctus, a deacon, was tortured with red-hot plates of brass pressed to his body. Even when interrogators demanded his name and origin, he would only say: “I am a Christian.”
Maturus and others were scourged, mauled by beasts, and finally killed by the sword.
Some Christians, after enduring torture, were beheaded. Others were thrown to wild beasts in the amphitheater, torn apart as the crowds cheered. Christian women were exposed naked in the amphitheater, and then they were brutally raped and defiled.
The Martyrs of Lyon (177) show us the sheer brutality of Roman persecution — mob violence, sadistic tortures, public spectacles — and the astonishing endurance of Christians from the weakest slave girl to the oldest bishop.
This historian, Eusebius, concludes his account with reverence:
“They were also so zealous in their imitation of Christ… that though they suffered much, yet little was this in their eyes, as they hastened to Christ.” (HE V.2.5)
Decius (249–251)
Decius came to power after a period of crisis and instability. He believed Rome’s decline was due to the neglect of the traditional gods.
Instituted the first empire-wide persecution. He issued an edict requiring every inhabitant of the Roman Empire (except Jews who were exempt) to offer sacrifice publicly. By forcing sacrifice, he hoped to restore Rome’s unity, the pax deorum (“peace with the gods”), and consolidate loyalty to himself as emperor.
People had to:
Offer incense, wine, and sometimes animals to the traditional Roman gods.
Pray explicitly for the health and safety of the emperor.
Do this in the presence of officials.
Once completed, they received a signed and sealed certificate called a libellus (think of it as a kind of early COVID passport ;) ), proving they had sacrificed. Those who refused were tortured or killed; those who complied sparked the later Donatist controversy.
For Christians, the demand was impossible. To sacrifice to pagan gods and pray to them for the emperor’s health was to commit idolatry. Refusing to sacrifice made them instant criminals. Many Christians were executed if they refused outright. Many were tortured until they complied. Those who sacrificed or bribed officials to obtain false libelli were released.
St. Agatha of Sicily was martyred during this persecution. Arrested as a Christian, she refused to yield her chastity. Sources say her breasts were torn off with iron pincers. She later died in prison from her wounds. She is often depicted in iconography carrying her severed breasts on a platter (which later artists mistakenly represented as loaves of bread).
Martirio di sant'Agata (taglio dei seni) - Church of Sant'Agata Irpina Eventually, the Church split over this. Some believers (“the lapsed”) offered sacrifice under pressure. Others (“confessors” and “martyrs”) held firm and suffered. This led directly to the Novatianist schism, where some insisted the lapsed could never be restored.
Valerian (253–260)
Decius’ persecutions failed to eradicate Christianity. Unlike Decius (who went after everyone), Valerian sought to strategically decapitate the church by targeting his persecution directly at Christian clergy: bishops, priests, and deacons. In 257, he issued an edict that ordered the Clergy to perform sacrifices to the Roman gods or face exile. In 258, he executed Christian leaders outright if they refused. Senators, knights, and imperial officials who were Christians lost property, titles, and sometimes their lives. This economically weakened the Christian community’s ability to care for the poor, widows, and orphans. Christian women of rank were exiled. He made Christian assemblies forbidden, which meant Eucharist, baptisms, and liturgical life became crimes in themselves. This effectively drove Christians back into the catacombs to worship in secret. Some of the most famous early martyrs died under Valerian:
Pope St. Sixtus II (August 6, 258) was beheaded in the catacombs while celebrating the Eucharist.
St. Lawrence the Deacon (August 10, 258):
Ordered to hand over the treasures of the Church.
He presented the poor and sick, saying, “These are the treasures of the Church.”
He was roasted alive on a gridiron — while being burned, he mocked his executioners, saying, “Turn me over, I’m done on this side.”
St. Cyprian of Carthage (September 14, 258). a bishop, writer, and theologian. St Cyprian refused to sacrifice to the gods. He was beheaded publicly, his blood inspiring Christians across North Africa. The public examination of Cyprian by the proconsul in Carthage, Galerius Maximus, on 14 September 258 has been preserved:
Galerius Maximus: "Are you Thascius Cyprianus?"
Cyprian: "I am."
Galerius: "The most sacred Emperors have commanded you to conform to the Roman rites."
Cyprian: "I refuse."
Galerius: "Take heed for yourself."
Cyprian: "Do as you are bid; in so clear a case I may not take heed."
Galerius, after briefly conferring with his judicial council, with much reluctance pronounced the following sentence: "You have long lived an irreligious life, and have drawn together a number of men bound by an unlawful association, and professed yourself an open enemy to the gods and the religion of Rome; and the pious, most sacred and august Emperors ... have endeavoured in vain to bring you back to conformity with their religious observances; whereas therefore you have been apprehended as principal and ringleader in these infamous crimes, you shall be made an example to those whom you have wickedly associated with you; the authority of law shall be ratified in your blood." He then read the sentence of the court from a written tablet: "It is the sentence of this court that Thascius Cyprianus be executed with the sword."
Cyprian: "Thanks be to God."
Valerian’s persecution only lasted about three years (257–260), but in that short time, the Church lost some of its most prominent leaders. The persecution ended suddenly when Valerian was captured alive in battle by the Persians (the only Roman emperor ever taken prisoner). His successor, Gallienus, issued an edict of toleration in 260.
Diocletian & Galerius (303–311) — The Great Persecution
If Decius and Valerian sought to cripple the Church, the emperors Diocletian and Galerius sought to eradicate it. What followed is remembered simply as The Great Persecution — the broadest, most systematic attempt to annihilate Christianity in Roman history.
In February of 303, Diocletian issued the first of four edicts against the Christians. Churches were ordered destroyed, Scriptures and other religious texts were burned, and bishops were imprisoned. Soon after, all Christian gatherings were outlawed, clergy were compelled to sacrifice to the gods or face death, and finally every Christian — man, woman, child, slave, or senator — was required to perform sacrifice. What began in the court at Nicomedia spread across the empire like a sickness.
In Nicomedia itself, the imperial palace was struck by lightning, which Diocletian’s soothsayers blamed on Christians. Soldiers were ordered to scour the city for believers, dragging them from their homes. Many were burned alive in public squares.
Eusebius of Caesarea, who lived through these years, records in his book Martyrs of Palestine horrors that are difficult to read. These include accounts of women being sexually mutilated and impaled. In Palestine, Christians were tied behind wild horses and dragged to their deaths. In Phrygia, an entire Christian village was surrounded by soldiers and set aflame, and every inhabitant was burned alive in their own homes for refusing to sacrifice. In other places, confessors were hung upside down and flayed, their skin slowly peeled from their bodies while the crowds jeered.
Some were maimed in ways designed to mock their faith. Deacons had their right hands severed, the hands that distributed the Eucharist. Virgins were stripped naked and paraded before the crowds, then handed to soldiers to be repeatedly raped before being executed. Young men were roasted on gridirons, iron claws tearing their flesh, or red-hot plates applied to their bodies until they collapsed.
The cruelty was staggering. Women were raped, mutilated, or exposed in deliberate acts of desecration meant to break their faith and shame the Christian community. Some were said to have their breasts cut off as a mockery of their motherhood or virginity. In certain martyr acts (like those of Agatha of Sicily, her breasts were cut off.
One story, preserved in the Martyrs of Palestine, tells of Christians tied together and burned alive, their voices raised in psalms until the flames choked them. Another of a boy, no more than fifteen, who endured scourging, dismemberment, and finally beheading — never once denying Christ.
And yet, for all this, the Great Persecution did not succeed. It weakened the Church terribly, yes. Some lapsed and sought reconciliation later. But many more endured, and the sight of their suffering became a witness in itself. The more Rome tried to crush the Church, the more it seemed to multiply.
Galerius, one of the architects of the persecution, eventually fell sick with a disease so loathsome that his body rotted while he still lived. In 311, on his deathbed, he issued the Edict of Toleration, admitting that persecution had failed and asking Christians to pray for the health of the empire. Within two years, Constantine would emerge as emperor in the West, and within a decade, Christianity would be openly favored.
The Great Persecution, intended to extinguish the faith, instead purified it in fire. It gave the Church martyrs whose names are remembered to this day, and it demonstrated once more that the devil’s rage may be furious, but his power is limited. Rome threw everything it had against the Christians — fire, iron, beasts, humiliation, rape, torture — and still the Church endured.
Truly, the Gates of Hell could not prevail against it.
Constantine the Great (306–337)
Christians were granted a reprieve when Constantine legalized Christianity (Edict of Milan, 313) and Convened Council of Nicaea (325). Christians could emerge from the catacombs, copy, and distribute scriptures between congregations. Previously, getting caught with a copy of the scriptures or other christian text was a death sentence.
Constantine the Great had 3 sons: Constantine II, who ruled in the west (died in battle); Constans, who ruled the central provinces (was assassinated); and Constantius II, who ruled the east, eventually becoming the sole emperor. He was strongly pro-Arian and supported Arianism and the persecution and subjugation of nicene orthodoxy (which was the religion of the common person.)
Julian the Apostate (361–363)
We covered Julian in our previous article (but I’m reproducing it here for ease of continuity. If you’ve already read it, you can skip to Theodosius below). Julian is responsible for the “last gasp” of paganism. He tried to starve the Church culturally rather than martyr it. Thankfully, he died young on the Persian campaign.
Julian the Apostate (361–363 AD)
Julian was raised a Christian but rejected the faith, converting back to Neoplatonic paganism.
This was the last major attempt to restore paganism as the empire’s religion.
Julian rebuilt pagan temples, reinstated sacrifices, and banned Christians from teaching classical literature (to cut them off from culture). He tried to present paganism as morally and intellectually superior.
He called Christ a “Galilean” and mocked the Church’s unity and power.
His reign was short, and after his death, support for true orthodox Christianity varied.
Jovian the Apostate (363–364)
Restored Christianity and reversed the pagan reforms. He was succeeded by two brothers who split the empire, one Valentinian I (364–375), a Christian in the west. In the east, his brother, Valens (364–378), an Arian Christian who opposed orthodoxy, was killed in battle with the Goths 14 years into his reign.
Gratian (367–383)
Gratian inherited power in the West. He removed state subsidies for pagan cults, a dagger in the heart of the old paganism that sent it into it’s final demise. Once those subsidies disappeared, paganism lost its institutional foundation. It had little ability to function without state funds because it wasn’t structured like the Church (with voluntary tithes, networks of bishops, etc.).
Gratian refused the title Pontifix Maximus, a pagan title. This title referred to the pagan high priest of the Roman state religion - a political and religious office responsible for maintaining peace with the state god through correct rituals. Pontifex means bridge builder - one who mediates between God and men. Gratian dropped the title; however, eventually the bishop of Rome took it up, which is why the Roman Catholic Pope is referred to as the Pontiff today.
Theodosius I (379–395)
Issued the Edict of Thessalonica (380), making Nicene Christianity the official religion. He helped finally put an end to the Arian heresy in the east and made Orthodoxy the official state religion of the Roman Empire. Theodosius also outlawed pagan sacrifices and closed temples. By his death, paganism as a public religion was essentially finished.
The blood of the martyrs could not be silenced. The more Rome persecuted, the more Christianity grew. Persecution showed the futility of violence against the Kingdom of God. But if swords failed, the devil’s subtler weapon remained: corruption from within.
The Persecution and Triumph of Christian Women
The cruelty of the demonically motivated persecutions fell on all Christians, but the treatment of women often revealed the depravity of demonically motivated pagan hatred most starkly. Roman society already treated women, especially slaves, as vulnerable and expendable; when women were Christians, their bodies became battlefields where Rome tried to mock chastity, corrupt purity, and desecrate the very vessels of life.
The accounts we have are horrifying. During the Decian persecution, a young noblewoman named Agatha of Sicily was arrested for refusing to renounce Christ and yield her chastity to the governor Quintianus. Sources say that he was enraged by her vow of Chastity. Quintianus first tried persuasion: flattery, promises of wealth, power, and status if she would renounce Christ and accept him. When that failed, he resorted to brutality. He placed her under the care of a brothel-keeper named Aphrodisia, hoping repeated exposure to lust and violation would break her. When she refused, he ordered her tortured with scourging and racking, but she remained unshaken in her confession of faith. Enraged, the officials ordered her breasts cut off with iron pincers — a mutilation designed not only to cause agony but to desecrate the very symbols of maternity and life. After her mutilation, she offered the following prayer:
“O Lord, Thou who hast created me and preserved me from my infancy, who hast taken from me the love of the world and given me patience to suffer: receive my spirit.”
Agatha endured further torture, including being rolled over shards of glass and burning coals. Finally, she died in prison, her body broken but her chastity intact.
To the pagans, this was humiliation; to the early Church, her endurance became sanctity. She is remembered even now in the hymns of East and West, carrying her severed breasts like trophies of incorruptible courage.
In Gaul, in 177, the slave girl Blandina became the focus of pagan fury. She was scourged, burned, exposed to beasts, and tossed by a wild bull. Eyewitnesses testify that her body was broken and scarred in every way imaginable — yet her lips never formed a denial. Instead, she prayed, and the other Christians said they saw in her not a slave but Christ Himself conquering through weakness. Her confession — “I am a Christian, and nothing wicked is done among us” — was repeated even as her body was broken.
In the Great Persecution under Diocletian (303–311), women again were singled out. Eusebius records in his Martyrs of Palestine that young virgins were stripped naked and paraded before the crowds; some were handed to soldiers to be raped before being burned or beheaded. Others were mutilated: their breasts cut off, their bodies scorched with heated plates of brass, and impaled on stakes. These tortures were not random — they were designed to desecrate what was most sacred about the body, to mock Christian purity, and to turn the female form into a spectacle of derision.
Yet, many of these women, like Blandina and Agatha, endured with astonishing strength. Their tormentors intended to break them publicly and humiliate them beyond repair. Instead, their refusal to yield exposed the emptiness and base debauchery of pagan cruelty. The brutality that sought to desecrate them became, in God’s providence, the means by which their holiness was revealed and revered.
We remember them even today, as saints - the best of the best spiritual athletes - crowned with glory. Where the empire sought to destroy dignity, heaven revealed sanctity. If the martyrs in general are the seed of the Church, the women martyrs are its flowers, radiant in beauty because they were watered with their own blood.
II. Heresies: The Corruption from Within
As the other parallel effort to weaken and destroy the church from within, the demons planted and encouraged the growth of diverse heresies (some of which we saw in the previous article). The Devil only had to influence something he had already corrupted, human hearts.
Matthew 15:19 – Christ says: “For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies”
Heresy appeared as soon as churches were planted, even in the New Testament era. The apostles warn constantly against “false prophets” and “wolves in sheep’s clothing” (Acts 20:29) and “those who do not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” (1 John 4:2-3). Indeed the St. John warns us of the devil’s hand in this:
Revelation 16:13–14 - “And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs coming out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.”
From the onset, the Church was fighting spiritual counterfeits and false prophets, often created from within. The Devil was not going to cede more territory without a fight.
Matthew 7:15–16 - “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits.”
Matthew 24:24 - “For false christs and false prophets will arise and show great signs and wonders, so as to deceive, if possible, even the elect.”
2 Peter 2:1 - “But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.”
1 John 4:1 - “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.”
2 Corinthians 11:13–14 - “For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light.”
Why am I walking through all of these heresies again? Well because it seems that when the Demons hit on a good idea that get’s traction that they don’t let it go. While the church fought against these heresies, many of the ideas in these heresies seems to pop back up time and again throughout history. It is my belief that heresies tend to collapse under their own weight of falsehood, but the ideas get recycled into new permutations and combinations.
Docetism (1st–2nd century)
Believed that Christ only seemed to have a real body, suffer, and die (dokein = “to seem”). This heresy sought to undermine the Incarnation. In response, St. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 AD) insisted that Christ “suffered truly,” not in appearance.
Echoes of the Docetist heresy can be seen today in any theology that treats the sacraments or the Cross as mere symbols. (Looking at you, Zwingli and all those influenced by your demonic heresies)
This heresy is specifically opposed in 1 John and by Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 AD).
Ebionites / Judaizers (1st–2nd century)
The Judiazers maintained that Jesus is the Messiah but was not God. Thus, for them, the Mosaic Law remained binding, which included advocating for the circumcision of gentile converts. They reduced Christ to a mere prophet and denied His divinity. We can see the church’s efforts against this heresy in the Gospel of John, Paul’s letters (Galatians), and the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15).
We see this heresy popping up again today in Liberal Christianities that emphasize Jesus as “just a moral teacher” and in rabbinic Judaism that seeks to relegate Christ to just an itinerant rabbi, and in the search for the “historical Jesus.”
This heresy serves as the backdrop of many of Paul’s teachings that speak against Works. Modern protestants, particularly Evangelicals, have greatly misunderstood this. Paul faces a challenge: he plants a church and gets it growing, only to have the Judaizers come in right behind him as soon as he leaves, insisting that the new Christian community founded by Paul must follow the Mosaic Law and all of its works. When Paul writes his epistles decrying Works, what he’s specifically speaking against are the Works of the Mosaic Law. Unfortunately, in modern days, the word “Works” has been interpreted not as works of the Mosaic law, but as any Christian effort or deed. This is a total misreading, so much for Sola Scriptura, but you still hear evangelical/protestant pastors decrying a “works based salvation” completely (or perhaps purposely) forgetting that Christ said:
“If you love Me, keep My commandments.”
John 14:15
Yet these modern heretics constantly attack Roman Catholics, Mormons, and Orthodox Christians, claiming that we believe in a “works-based salvation.”
Gnosticism (2nd century; Valentinus, Basilides)
Gnostics believed that there was secret knowledge that only they had that was required for salvation. They also believed that the material creation is evil, made by a false and evil god they called the “demiurge.”
Gnosticism claimed that salvation came only through secret knowledge (gnosis) available only to the elite. They taught that Christ was a revealer of hidden truths, not the Savior who took on flesh and died. Gnosticism presented counterfeit claims of illumination and theosis, leading to elitism.
This heresy was spreading wide enough and early enough that the apostles warned against it in the scriptures. St. John warns against those who “do not confess Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” (1 John 4:2–3). Colossians also pushes back against early “philosophy, empty deceit…worship of angels” (Col 2:8,18).
St. Irenaeus, in his book Against Heresies (~180), dismantles their claims.
Some of the ideas behind this heresy persist today in New Age syncretism, eastern “guru” sects, free masonry, Mormonism (specifically the temple endowment), and other “hidden code” spiritualities.
Marcion (c. 140)
Marcion positioned himself as a reformer of Christianity, not as a prophet or apostle. Marcion claimed the God of the Old Testament was evil and that Christ came from a different, higher deity. He rejected the Old Testament entirely and created his own “canon” of scripture using edited versions of Luke + Paul’s letters. Marcion claimed that the existing scriptures had been distorted and needed correction.
This heresy was a demonic wedge meant to sever Christianity from its Jewish roots and the testimony of Scripture. We see this same heresy show up in most Gnostic sects.
Writers like Tertullian (Against Marcion) and St. Irenaeus (Against Heresies) attacked him vigorously, because he mutilated Scripture and denied the unity of the Old and New Testaments. As a result, the Church affirmed both Testaments.
We see this appear today in modern “progressive” ideas of pitting Jesus against the Old Testament. This attitude also shows up with the reformers in the protestant reformation. In fact there are more than a few parallels between both Marcion and Luther:
Rejection of the Fullness of Scripture
Marcion cut down the canon, keeping only a redacted Luke and Paul’s epistles, rejecting the Old Testament entirely. He couldn’t reconcile the God of Israel with the Father of Jesus.
Luther did not throw out the Old Testament, but he did elevate some books and downgrade others. For example, he called the Epistle of James “an epistle of straw,” questioned Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation, and rearranged the canon according to his theological priorities.
Both felt empowered to judge Scripture itself, deciding what counted as the “true Word of God.”
Discontinuity with Tradition
Marcion rejected the apostolic tradition and the continuity between Israel and the Church. His Christianity was disconnected from the historic faith.
Luther rejected much of the Church’s Sacred Tradition, elevating Sola Scriptura—the idea that Scripture alone is authoritative. But Scripture had always been understood within the Church’s Tradition.
Both made themselves judges over the apostolic deposit of faith, rather than submitting to the life of the Church.
Distortion of God’s Nature
Marcion presented a radical dualism: the “harsh, legalistic” Creator-God vs. the “loving, merciful” God revealed by Jesus.
Luther framed salvation in terms of God’s absolute sovereignty and man’s total corruption and “total inability" to turn towards God. In practice, this sometimes produced a picture of God as harsh judge appeased only by faith alone, rather than the loving Father who heals His children.
Parallel: Both distorted the balance of God’s justice and mercy, reducing salvation to a legal framework rather than a healing communion.
Break from the Visible Church
Marcion set up his own rival church, ordaining bishops, priests, and deacons, in direct opposition to the apostolic Church.
Luther broke with Rome and gave rise to a cascade of Protestant communities, each interpreting Scripture differently, resulting in thousands of denominations.
Parallel: Both led movements that fragmented unity and created “churches” outside the apostolic body. This as been the single greatest apostasy in the history of Christianity with millions deceived into countless myriad of heresies, man of which grow and multiply and attack Christ’s true body.
“Reformer” Self-Identity
Marcion claimed he was restoring the “pure” gospel of Paul that the Church had corrupted by mixing it with Judaism.
Luther claimed he was restoring the “true” gospel of grace that Rome had corrupted with works and traditions.
Parallel: Both framed themselves as reformers standing against a corrupted institution—but in doing so, they severed themselves from the very continuity of the Church Christ founded.
We see the logical conclusion of these ideas come to fruition during the second great awakening with the founding and rise of Mormonism, the Jehovah’s Witnesses (which carry on arian ideas), and even the rise of Islam.
Sabellianism / Modalism (early 200s)
Denied the Trinity by claiming Father, Son, and Spirit were just “modes” or “manifestations” of one God, not distinct Persons.
The Purpose of this heresy is to subvert the Trinity. Hippolytus refutes this heresy, and church councils condemn it.
Many mormon critics point to many instances of Modalism in the Book of Mormon. Generally Mormons will not recognize these instances as such. Examples below:
Mosiah 15:1–4
Abinadi, teaching about Christ, says:
“God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people.
And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God… Thus becoming the Father and the Son—
And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth.
And thus the flesh becoming subject to the Spirit, or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptation, and yieldeth not to the temptation, but suffereth himself to be mocked, and scourged, and cast out, and disowned by his people.”
Here, God is said to be the Son of God (Christ) when he descends to earth in the flesh. Then Christ is described as both the Father and the Son, one Person wearing two roles, rather than two distinct Persons in communion. This is clear modalist theology. Yet we see how early heresies are recycled and repurposed to fracture the body of Christ and lead people astray. The demons are desparate to hold onto their territory.
Mosiah 16:15
“Teach them that redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father.”
Again, Christ is not distinguished from the Father, but identified as the Father.
Ether 3:14
Christ speaking to the brother of Jared:
“Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son.”
This is a textbook modalist statement—collapsing the distinction between Father and Son.
Alma 11:38–39
Amulek teaching Zeezrom:
“Now Zeezrom saith again unto him: Is the Son of God the very Eternal Father? And Amulek said unto him, Yea, he is the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth, and all things which in them are.”
This is explicitly affirming that the Son of God is the Father, which is the core of modalism.
Title Page of the Book of Mormon
“…to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God.”
Not just Christ as Son, but Christ as the Eternal God, without distinction of Persons.
In Orthodox theology:
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God in essence (homoousios), but three distinct Persons (hypostases).
Modalism denies this distinction of persons and says God just appears as Father, Son, or Spirit in different modes.
Opposed by Tertullian and later councils.
Montanism (late 2nd century)
Founded by Montanus in Phrygia. Montanus claimed to bring new prophecy, emphasizing ecstatic visions and extreme asceticism. This began as a charismatic movement emphasizing prophecy and asceticism, but quickly veered into claiming a “new revelation” beyond Christ and the apostles.
Again, a demonic counterfeit: mimic the Spirit, but twist it toward pride, extremism, and schism. Bishops and synods across Asia Minor and Rome opposed Montanism. Eusebius records exorcisms of Montanist prophets.
It presented itself as the “new age” of the Spirit beyond Christ and the apostles. introducing a Counterfeit of the Holy Spirit, bypassing bishops.
I believe that we see echoes of this heresy alive and well today in Charismatic movements that elevate personal revelation and spiritual experiences above Scripture and Tradition, including Pentecostalism and even Mormonism (with beliefs in modern prophets and personal revelation).
Novatianism (mid-200s)
This was a schism and a not doctrinal heresy. We recounted the persecutions earlier and while there were many martyrs there were also many who recanted and offered sacrifices to the roman pagan gods. As a result, the Novatianists sought to refuse readmission of Christians who had lapsed under persecution.
This “heresy” shows how rigorism and legalistic thinking can fracture the Church.
Adoptionism (late 2nd–3rd century)
Adoptionists denied that Jesus was God’s only begotten son, saying instead that Jesus was born mortal and “adopted” as the Son of God at baptism. This heresy denies the eternal divinity of Christ. It is related to a later heresy that would emerge as the basis of Arianism, subordinianism. It was Condemned at Antioch (268).
We see the recurrence of this heresy in Modern Unitarianism. Unitarianism is a theological movement within protestant Christianity that rejects the doctrine of the Trinity. Unitarians affirm the unity of God but deny that He exists eternally as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In most forms of Unitarianism, Jesus is seen as a prophet, moral teacher, or uniquely inspired man, but not as the eternal Son of God. They also believe that the Holy Spirit is not a divine Person. The Holy Spirit is usually understood as God’s power or presence, not a distinct hypostasis (Person).
The roots of Unitarian thought go back to the early heresies (e.g., Adoptionism, Arianism, Socinianism). The modern movement emerged in the 16th-century Reformation, especially among anti-Trinitarian thinkers like Faustus Socinus in Poland and Transylvania.
In England and America (17th–18th centuries), Unitarian congregations formally separated from Trinitarian Christianity. In the U.S., “Unitarianism” merged with Universalism in the 20th century to form the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA). This body has left behind Christian identity altogether, embracing pluralism, humanism, and interfaith spirituality. In some parts of the world (e.g., Transylvania, Romania, and Hungary), there are still explicitly Christian Unitarian churches that deny the Trinity but affirm Jesus as Messiah.
1. Unitarian Universalists (UU)
Descended from 18th–19th century Christian Unitarianism.
Today they are not really Christian—they are pluralistic, allowing belief in anything (Christianity, Buddhism, atheism, etc.).
They completely reject the doctrine of the Trinity.
2. Oneness Pentecostals (also called “Apostolic” or “Jesus Only” Pentecostals)
They are modalists, very close to ancient Sabellianism.
Teach that God is one Person who manifests Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in different modes.
Believe baptism must be done “in the name of Jesus” only, not in the Trinitarian formula.
3. Christadelphians
Founded in the 19th century.
Reject the Trinity and the divinity of Christ in the Orthodox sense.
Believe Jesus was a man uniquely filled with God’s Spirit, not God incarnate from eternity.
4. Jehovah’s Witnesses
Not technically “Unitarian” in the old sense, but very similar.
Believe only the Father (Jehovah) is God.
Jesus is a created being (the archangel Michael), and the Holy Spirit is an impersonal force.
5. Iglesia ni Cristo (Philippines-based)
Founded in 1914 in the Philippines.
Reject the Trinity, claiming Jesus is only a man (not divine by nature).
Teach that only their church is the true church.
6. Biblical Unitarians
A small modern movement reviving classic Christian Unitarianism (like Socinians in the 16th century).
Believe in one God, the Father, and deny the divinity of Christ and the Spirit.
From an Orthodox perspective, all of these fall into variations of Unitarianism, Arianism, or Modalism—heresies the early Church confronted and rejected at the Ecumenical Councils. Orthodoxy has always insisted that the Trinity is not optional: the Father, Son, and Spirit are co-eternal, co-equal, and consubstantial. The Church Fathers saw denials of Christ’s divinity as spiritually dangerous because they strip the Incarnation of its saving power. St. Athanasius put it: “That which He has not assumed He has not healed.” If Christ is not truly God, He cannot save; if He is not truly man, He cannot redeem human nature.
Arianism (early 4th century; Arius of Alexandria)
A heresy started by an Alexandrian priest named Arius. He taught the heresy that Christ, as “The Son,” is the highest created creature, and not co-eternal God. A dangerous heresy, this undermines Christ’s divinity. This was perhaps the most dangerous heresy in Church history, one that almost conquered the church and the empire until it was finally condemned under Theodosius I.
The Arian heresy sparked the first Ecumenical Council of Nicaea (325 AD). The council was called by emperor Constantine the Great in order to try to settle a matter that was causing a lot of trouble in the church. Contrary to popular mythology, Constantine did not decide on matters of doctrine at this council. Nor did he or anyone else create new doctrines. What they did do was hear the arguments of Arius and his supporters, debate the issue, and then finally articulate and reaffirm the orthodox belief that Christ is the divine Son of God, a belief that the church had always held, documenting it and producing the Nicene Creed - a creed still in use today by many Christians - although some have made modifications to it since it's original formulation.
Saint Athanasius, a hero of orthodoxy
The council declared the Son to be “of one essence” (homoousios) with the Father. In my mind, based on what I've read about the council, the real hero of this story is Saint Athanasius, who fought tirelessly against this dangerous heresy and played a central role in the formulation of the creed. For that reason, let's honor Saint Athanasius by recapping his role and efforts.
At the time of the Council, Athanasius was a young deacon and secretary to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria. He wasn’t yet a bishop himself, but he accompanied Alexander and was already recognized as an intelligent and skilled theologian. Athenasius helped craft Alexander’s arguments against Arius, and he almost certainly had a hand in shaping the language of the Nicene Creed, especially the decisive word homoousios (“of one essence” with the Father). After Alexander’s repose in 328, Athanasius was chosen as bishop (patriarch) of Alexandria, becoming the chief defender of Nicene orthodoxy for the next half century. The Arians hated him because he refused every compromise formula (such as “similar essence” or homoiousios) that was proposed to dilute the Nicene confession. His enemies mocked him with the phrase: “Athanasius contra mundum” — Athanasius against the world.
Unfortunately, the first council was not the end of the Arian heresy. Constantine allowed Arius to live and attempted to reform him by permitting his return from exile. Arius and his supporters then went on to infiltrate many areas of the church, even setting up separate parallel churches based on Arius's heretical teachings. During the intervening years, it was effectively exported. Arian missionaries converted many of the Germanic tribes (Goths, Vandals, Lombards) before they ever heard of Nicene Christianity. Recent historians now even believe that Islam was based mainly on and influenced by Arianism, hence Islam's denial that Jesus was the Christ (instead, he is just a Prophet), the Son of God, and a denial of the resurrection. Even after Theodosius put an end to Arianism, it lived on among the so-called “barbarian” peoples and the Arabs for centuries. Eventually, it returned to corrupt the creed of the Latin West with the filioque, which greatly contributed to the Great Schism between the Roman Catholic church (the Latins) and the Eastern churches (Eastern Orthodox). The rise of Islam led to the conquest of many Eastern Christian lands, as well as the subjugation of the Eastern Church for centuries due to Muslim conquest and expansionism. The Devil and his demons used this heresy to do untold damage to the body of Christ, enslave millions in false heretical beliefs that led them away from Christ, and to blunt the spread of true orthodox Christianity.
Side note. Had Arianism succeeded, then the Mormon hypothesis of a Great and Total Apostasy would be true, and a restoration would have been needed.
Despite numerous apostasies over the years, there has never been a complete and total apostasy. The Orthodox Church and the original teachings of Christ and the apostles remain alive and preserved on earth today.
And hold up my LDS friends/readers before you go supposing that perhaps Arianism was the "true faith” of the apostles and that its defeat was the great apostasy, you should know that Arius and Eusebius were both from the same theological schools, taught by men that local church councils had condemned as heretics Lucius and Macarius, for teaching the old heresies of adoptionism and subordinationism. (Both of which were rooted out as heresies early on in the history of the church.)
Arianism appears to have flourished because it subordinated the church to imperial authority, and a cultural elite; thereby granting the emperor and other wealthy and powerful individuals increased political influence through the church. Due to the state of the church after the Roman persecutions, many bishops were willing to compromise their beliefs to avert future bloodshed.
Athanasius was one of the few who were not willing to compromise the truth of the Gospel for political expediency. He was a staunch opponent of Heresy and a thorn in the side of the Arians all his life. As a result, Athanasius spent much of his life being driven out of his patriarchal episcopate by emperors and bishops sympathetic to Arianism or its compromises. He was exiled five times, for a total of about 17 years out of his 45-year episcopate.
First exile (335–337) — Deposed at the Synod of Tyre, accused of violence and misconduct by his Arian opponents, and sent to Trier in Gaul.
Second exile (339–346) — Fled to Rome when the Arian bishop Gregory of Cappadocia was installed in Alexandria. Pope Julius I and the Council of Sardica supported him. Gregory was backed by the emperor Constantius II and other wealthy and powerful Arians such as Eusebius of Nicomedia (the chief Arian bishop).
The people of Alexandria who knew the true faith were having none of it either. They loved Athenasius, and when the false Arian bishop Gregory arrived, they rioted. Eusebius had Imperial troops accompany Gregory into the city to enforce his installation (which would have put one of the major patriarchates of the church in Arian hands.) The soldiers stormed the churches, beat orthodox clergy and laity loyal to Athanasius, and drove them out. The people came to see Gregory as an imperial usurper, an “anti-bishop." Once the emperor who backed him died, Gregory was left without support, and the local populace of Alexandria rose up and murdered him, paving the way for Athanasius to return.
Third exile (356–362) — Driven out by Emperor Constantius II (an Arian sympathizer). Athanasius hid in the Egyptian desert among the monks.
Fourth exile (362–363) — Briefly exiled by Emperor Julian the Apostate, who opposed Christianity as a whole.
Fifth exile (365–366) — Banished again under Emperor Valens (an Arian). Returned after about a year.
Modern-day echoes of this heresy persist in Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Islam. Mormon (LDS) theology views Christ as the firstborn/first created of the Father, and as being subject to and subordinate to the Father. It views both Christ and God the Father as having not only separate/different essences but different intelligences and different physical bodies—a line of thinking very similar to Arianism.
Pneumatomachians (late 4th century)
The Nicene Council and Creed did not fully spell out the role and nature of the Holy Spirit, and it wouldn't do so until the following council at Constantinople.
The Pneumatomachians appeared in the mid-4th century, after the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea (325). They were essentially an offshoot of semi-Arianism: they accepted that the Son was divine (though often still hesitantly), but they denied the full divinity of the Holy Spirit.
They argued that the Spirit was a creature or ministering angelic power, not equal to the Father and the Son. They taught that only the Father and the Son shared the divine essence (ousia), leaving the Spirit outside the Trinity.
The Cappadocian Fathers (St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory the Theologian, St. Gregory of Nyssa) rose up against them.
St. Basil wrote On the Holy Spirit, a foundational work defending the Spirit’s divinity.
St. Gregory the Theologian famously said, “The Old Testament proclaimed the Father openly, the Son more obscurely. The New revealed the Son and hinted at the divinity of the Spirit. Now the Spirit dwells among us, and supplies us with clearer demonstration of Himself.”
The First Council of Constantinople (381) (the 2nd Ecumenical Council) condemned the Pneumatomachians and affirmed the full divinity of the Holy Spirit, expanding the Nicene Creed to its present form and adding:
“And [we believe] in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified…”
The Pneumatomachians show how heresy often develops gradually—people tried to “compromise” with Arianism by affirming the Son but still denying the Spirit.
The Church’s response demonstrates that salvation requires the full Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. If the Spirit is not God, then He cannot make us partakers of divine life (theosis).
I should point out that echos of this heresy also appear in the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Christodelphians who deny the divinity of the holy spirit in a similar way.
Apollinarianism (late 4th century)
This heresy was started by Apollinaris of Laodicea (c. 310–390), a learned bishop and friend of St. Athanasius. He fought against Arianism and strongly defended Christ’s divinity. But in trying to explain the Incarnation, he fell into error about Christ’s humanity. Apollinaris argued that Christ did not have a full human nature.
Specifically: Christ had a human body and a human “animal soul” (the life-force), but not a human rational mind/spirit (nous).
Instead, he believed that the Logos (the divine Word) took the place of Christ’s human rational mind. Basically, Apollinaris said that Jesus was God in a human body, without a human mind.
Apollinaris thought that if Christ had a human mind, He would be capable of sin.
He wanted to preserve Christ’s sinlessness and unity.
But in doing so, he denied Christ’s full humanity.
The Fathers argued that this teaching undermines salvation.
St. Gregory the Theologian famously said:
“That which He has not assumed, He has not healed; but that which is united to His Godhead is also saved.” (Epistle 101)
i.e. If Christ did not take on a full human mind, then the human mind remains unredeemed.
The heresy was formally condemned at:
Council of Alexandria (362) under St. Athanasius.
First Council of Constantinople (381)—the 2nd Ecumenical Council.
Apollinarianism shows how easy it is to go wrong by trying to “simplify” the mystery of the Incarnation.
Orthodox Christology insists:
Christ is fully God and fully man.
He has two complete natures (divine and human).
He has a human body, soul, and rational mind, united perfectly to the divine Word.
This is what the Fathers call the hypostatic union—Christ is one Person in two natures.
Donatism (4th–5th century)
Donatism is one of the most famous early Church controversies, especially in North Africa. It wasn’t so much a doctrinal heresy about the Trinity or Christ, but a schism about the nature of the Church and the sacraments.
After the Diocletian persecution (303–311), some bishops and clergy in North Africa handed over sacred books or collaborated with Roman authorities. These men were called traditores (“those who handed over”) (yes, this is where we get the modern english word Traitor.)
When the persecution ended, the question arose: What happens to the sacraments performed by clergy who had betrayed the faith? Are their baptisms and ordinations valid?
A bishop named Donatus of Carthage (d. 355) became the leader of a rigorist faction. The Donatists argued:
The Church must be pure and holy; sinful clergy corrupt the Church.
Sacraments performed by traditores (or other unworthy clergy) were invalid.
Only clergy living in holiness could administer valid sacraments.
They essentially created a “pure church” movement, separating from those they judged impure.
The wider Church, especially St. Augustine of Hippo, opposed Donatism.
Augustine argued:
The holiness of the Church comes from Christ, not from the personal worthiness of its ministers.
Sacraments are valid ex opere operato (“from the work done”), meaning their power comes from God’s grace, not the minister’s moral state.
A corrupt priest sins personally, but the sacrament he administers is still valid because it is Christ Himself who baptizes, absolves, and consecrates through the priest.
Church councils repeatedly condemned Donatism. The schism persisted for centuries, but eventually dwindled.
Donatism raises perennial questions about the Church’s holiness, unity, and authority.
Orthodoxy rejects Donatism because:
The Church is a hospital for sinners, not a museum for saints.
Clergy are called to holiness, but their personal sin does not nullify God’s action through the sacraments.
The unity of the Church is more important than the perfection of its individual members.
Nestorianism (5th century; Nestorius)
Nestorianism is one of the most important Christological heresies the Church had to confront, and its controversy gave us the Council of Ephesus (431) and the title of the Virgin Mary as Theotokos (“God-bearer”).
Started by Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople (installed 428).
A sincere but rigid preacher, heavily influenced by the Antiochene school of theology (which emphasized Christ’s humanity strongly, sometimes to the point of dividing Him).
Nestorius rejected the title Theotokos for the Virgin Mary.
He argued Mary should be called Christotokos (“Christ-bearer”) because she gave birth to the man Jesus, not to God. (catching echo’s of subordinationism/arianism here?)
His teaching implied a separation between the divine Word (Logos) and the human Jesus.
Nestorius presented Christ as two persons (prosopa) joined in a moral or cooperative union—one divine, one human—rather than as a single divine Person (hypostasis) with two natures.
Nestorianism made Jesus into a kind of “duo”—God alongside a man, not God become man.
St. Cyril of Alexandria became Nestorius’ chief opponent.
He insisted on the hypostatic union: one Person (the eternal Son of God) in two natures (divine and human), fully united, without division or confusion.
He defended the title Theotokos, because the one born of Mary is truly God the Word incarnate.
The Third Ecumenical Council of Ephesus (431):
Was called to deal with the Nestorian heresy. The council Condemned Nestorius’ teaching as heresy and declared that Mary is rightly called Theotokos. It also affirmed that Christ is one divine Person with two natures—fully God, fully man.
If Christ were two separate persons, then His humanity would not truly be united to His divinity. That means His death on the Cross would be the death of a man, not the death of the God-man. In Orthodox theology: “What is not assumed is not healed.” If the Word did not truly become man in one Person, humanity could not be fully saved. Nestorianism also undermined the reality of the Eucharist and the meaning of salvation itself, because it separated what God had joined.
There aren’t many true “Nestorians” left, since the Church condemned Nestorianism at the Council of Ephesus (431). But there are some modern groups historically linked to Nestorian theology or accused of holding it.
The Assyrian Church of the East
Historically labeled “Nestorian” by their opponents, though they themselves reject that label. Centered originally in Persia, later spread into Mesopotamia, India (the “St. Thomas Christians”), and China. They still exist today, mainly in Iraq, Iran, Syria, and in diaspora communities in the U.S. and elsewhere.
Ancient Church of the East
A 20th-century offshoot of the Assyrian Church of the East, formed in 1968 after a split over reforms. Theologically similar, and also sometimes called “Nestorian.”
Islam
When Muhammad encountered Christians in Arabia, many of them were influenced by both Arianism and Nestorian missionaries from the Church of the East.
Some scholars argue this is why the Qur’an misunderstands the Trinity as a triad of Father, Mother (Mary), and Son—reflecting distorted teaching inherited from heterodox groups rather than from Orthodox Christianity.
Monothelitism (7th century)
Monothelitism is one of the last Christological heresies the Church had to confront, a kind of “last gasp” attempt to undermine the divinity of Christ. Really this heresy was born out of a sense of political expediency, but to understand it we first need to roll back to the 5th century.
At the third ecumenical council of Ephesus (431), the Church condemned Nestorianism. The council affirmed instead that Christ is one divine Person (the eternal Word) and that Mary is rightly called Theotokos (God-bearer).
In the backlash to Nestorianism, some went too far the other way.
Eutyches, an archimandrite in Constantinople, argued that after the Incarnation, Christ had only one nature (mono-physis)—the divine nature, with His humanity essentially absorbed. This became known as Monophysitism, which caused a new controversy and resulted in the Fourth Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon, to deal with the monophysite errors.
The fourth ecumenical Council of Chalcedon (451 AD - 5th Century) declared that Christ is one Person in two natures, divine and human, “without confusion, without change, without division, without separation.” This was meant to safeguard both His full divinity (against Arians) and His full humanity (against Apollinarians and the Monophysites). Unfortunately, the council did not solve the controversy.
Some accepted Chalcedon: these became the Orthodox (Eastern Orthodox, later also Roman Catholics.)
Some rejected Chalcedon: especially in Egypt, Syria, and Armenia.
They said Chalcedon divided Christ into “two sons” and betrayed the teaching of St. Cyril of Alexandria.
These Christians became known as the Miaphysites (often called “Monophysites” by opponents), forming today’s Oriental Orthodox Churches (Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, Ethiopian, etc.). This fracture has not been healed to this day, but discussions between the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox church’s have seemed to indicate that the division was a result of misunderstandings of terminology due to translation between different languages.
This division was a political problem for the empire and the emperor. Egypt and Syria were large wealthy provinces but after Chalcedon, their loyalty to the Church in Constantinople was strained. The emperor felt that if the church was divided that the empire was weakened. This is just before the rise of Islam. Within a generation, much of the disaffected Miaphysite world would fall under Arab rule (partly because they did not feel strong loyalty to the Chalcedonian emperor.)
The Monothelite position was proposed in the early 600s by Emperor Heraclius and Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople. Their thought was that maybe we can satisfy both sides if we say Christ has two natures but only one will. To the Chalcedonians: “See, we affirm two natures.” To the Miaphysites: “See, we affirm one will, so Christ’s humanity and divinity act in total unity.” It was meant to be a compromise to hold the empire together.
In this heresy, the human will of Jesus was said to be absorbed or overridden by the divine. This belief preserved the appearance of Christ’s unity while avoiding the scandal (to some) of Christ having a “separate” human will that could be in tension with God. It was seen as a political compromise to heal divisions in the empire.
The Fathers argued that if Christ did not have a human will, then His humanity was incomplete. St. Maximus the Confessor (580–662) became the great defender of Dyothelitism (two wills).
He insisted Christ had both a fully human and fully divine will, but the human will was always in perfect harmony with the divine.
His famous line: “That which He has not assumed, He has not healed.” If Christ did not assume a human will, then the human will remains unredeemed.
As an Orthodox person you will encounter the name St. Maximus on occasion so let’s have a quick look at who he was.
St. Maximus was born around 580 in Constantinople. At one time he was a government official, and later in his life he became a monk. He was known for holiness, deep theology, and spiritual writings (his Centuries on Love and Ambigua are still treasured in Orthodoxy).
Maximus insisted that Christ must have both a divine will and a human will. Otherwise, Christ was not truly human, and the human will could not be healed and brought into union with God. He drew directly from Christ’s words in Gethsemane: “Not My will, but Yours be done” (Luke 22:42), which shows Christ had a real human will that freely submitted to the Father.
Because he resisted the emperor’s theological compromise, Maximus was arrested, exiled, and interrogated multiple times. At one trial, the imperial judges demanded he accept Monothelitism. He refused, saying:
“If the whole universe holds communion with the Patriarch [who was heretical], I will not. For I know from the Gospel that the Church is Christ’s Body, which is confessed by the faith and the divine Tradition.”
In 662, when he was about 82 years old, the emperor ordered his tongue cut out, so he could no longer speak the truth and his right hand cut off, so he could no longer write the truth. He was then exiled to the Caucasus, where he died shortly afterward, enduring terrible suffering.
Just 18 years later, at the Third Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (680–681), the Church upheld everything Maximus taught:
It condemned Monothelitism as heresy.
Christ has two wills (divine and human).
Christ has two energies (divine and human).
These are in perfect harmony in one divine Person.
Maximus was vindicated and is now called “Confessor” because he confessed the true faith despite persecution.
St. Maximus’ witness shows that Orthodox theology isn’t abstract philosophy—it’s about salvation. If Christ did not have a human will, then our wills—the very seat of our freedom and our struggle with sin—would remain unhealed. Because He did have a human will, freely united to the divine will, our own wills can be healed and aligned with God in Christ.
Iconoclasm (8th century)
From Greek eikon (icon/image) + klastes (breaker).
Iconoclasts (those who opposed icons) vs. Iconodules/Iconophiles (those who defended them).
This heresy arose due to the influence of the emperor but to understand it we need to understand some historical context.
Islam arose in the 7th century and quickly laid waste to the eastern part of the empire as well as northern Africa. Muslim armies quickly scored military victories over Byzantine territories (Syria, Palestine, Egypt) and North Africa.
Muslims forbade religious images.
Jews also rejected most religious images.
Some Byzantine emperors, thinking superstitiously and looking for reasons why they were losing battles to the invading muslim armies began to believe that icons had brought God’s judgment upon them. The emperor began to see icon veneration as a superstitious practice and that venerating icons violated the Second Commandment: “You shall not make for yourself a graven image…” (Exodus 20:4). They accused the faithful of idolatry, treating icons as if they were gods.
In 726AD Emperor Leo III (717–741) ordered the destruction of a famous icon of Christ over the Chalke Gate of the imperial palace in Constantinople. He issued edicts against the veneration of icons, which led to the persecution of monks and the faithful who resisted.
St. John of Damascus (675–749): Wrote powerful defenses of icons, teaching that because God became visible in Christ, it is proper to depict Him in art. His famous line: “I do not worship matter, I worship the Creator of matter, who became matter for my sake.”
The Second Council of Nicaea (787) was convened by Empress Irene. The council declared that the veneration (proskynesis) of icons is not idolatry, because honor passes to the prototype (the one depicted). It also affirmed icons as essential to the life of the Church, alongside Scripture and Tradition. After 787, icon veneration was restored, but opposition lingered.
Leo V (813–820) revived iconoclasm, leading to another round of persecutions. This second wave lasted until Empress Theodora restored icons in 843, after the death of her husband, Theophilos.
In 843, at the Synod of Constantinople, Empress Theodora and Patriarch Methodios officially restored icons. This event is celebrated as the Triumph of Orthodoxy, commemorated every year on the First Sunday of Great Lent. The Church declared once and for all that icons are integral to the faith.
The controversy wasn’t just about art, but about the Incarnation.
The Seventh Ecumenical Council (787) and later synods clarified this issue:
Affirmed the theology of icons as part of the deposit of faith. If Christ truly became man, with a real human body, then He can be depicted in images. To deny icons was, in effect, to deny that the invisible God became visible in Christ.
Only Christ may be depicted as God in human form, because only He assumed visible, tangible humanity.
God the Father is never shown as an old man—except symbolically in very specific liturgical contexts, but even then, the Orthodox Church tends to avoid it.
We see this heresy revived during iconoclastic events during the Protestant Reformation, where even today, protestants use the same iconoclast arguments to accuse Catholics and Orthodox of idolatry.
Martyrdom vs. Schism
Persecution from without purified and weakened the Church. Heresy from within divided it.
Martyrdom inspired conversions. Pagans marveled at Christians who sang hymns as they faced death. Tertullian: “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church.”
Schism drained strength. Arianism divided East and West. Donatism paralyzed North Africa. Nestorianism and Monophysitism fractured ancient patriarchates.
Swords failed. Cracks succeeded. Divide and Conquer. The devil and his hosts all know this pattern well.
Swords from without: Persecution continues in communist and Islamic regimes, and increasingly through soft coercion in secular societies.
Cracks from within: Ancient heresies live on.
Arianism → Jehovah’s Witnesses, Islamic anti-Trinitarianism.
Marcionism → “progressive” rejection of the Old Testament.
Montanism → “prophetic” movements prioritizing ecstasy over obedience.
Donatism → purity-sects denying sacraments.
Iconoclasm → reduction of worship to bare words.
The devil’s strategies are old. They are repeated because they work.
Conclusion
Violence without, corruption within. That has been part of the devil’s strategy since the first century. But the story does not end with Rome. When paganism collapsed and Christianity became the empire’s public faith, the devil pivoted yet again. If brute force and heresy could not destroy the Church, perhaps fragmentation on an even larger scale could.
That story belongs to the next chapter:
Part IV — Divide and Conquer: Sowing the seeds of Division
We will trace how the seeds of the Protestant Reformation were planted. With fragmentation elevated into self perpetuating systems, not just accidents.
Note that I’m leaving out some of the grizzly details, which we’ll come back around to later. Roman torture and persecution was evil and barbaric, including all kinds of sexual abuse and torture, as well as physical mutilation.