Arius

During the quiet period of the Corona-Crisis (since early March 2020) there is time to read books which are already since long on the shelves. So, I read again Rowan Willimas on Arius, first published in 1987 and I have the second edition of 2001.

For the history of Islam, Arius is quiet important, because many people claim (especially on the Christian side) that Muhammad was a follower of Arius. So, what is truth here?
Arius was born somewhere on the Libyan coast, before 280, perhaps even about 250 or somewhat later. He moved to the greatest town of the East Roman empire, Alexandria in Egypt, and was ordained a priest in 313. It was a turbulent period of the last great persecutions of Christians beginning in 303 under emperor Diocletianus and this only finished in 313. In the western part of the empire the pesecutions were not that serious, but it was different in the eastern sections. Especially emperor Galerius who succeeded to Diocletianus in 305 was a fervent opponent of Christianity. Many Christian from Egypt were taken prisoner and sent to the mines in Palestine or executed. Quite many also became apostates, were willing to offer to the emperor some incense, bribe officials and could continue to lead their lives. But what was the policy about them when the persecutions were over? Some were lenient, others were very hard. Bishop Peter of Alexandria wanted to forgive them, but his opponent Melitius was less lenient and they were not accepted as church members: priests and bishops should be removed from their positions. So, the church of Alxandria was already in conflict at that period (like in other places, like Carthago, where Augustine later worked).
In 318 Arius as a popular priest and gifted serious preacher came in conflict with bishop Alexander of Alexandria, the successor to Peter. The latter gave an interpretation of the book of the Hebrew Bible Proverbs, 8:22-3 about the Wisdom, some kind of figure, designing the world and helping God. In Muslim mysticism this is similar to the Nur Muhammad as the first being to be created in the process of the martabat tujuh, or seven steps towards creation:
Proverbs 8:22. The Lord brought me forth as the first of his works, before his deeds of old. 
23: I was appointed from eternity, from the beginning, before the world began.

In the interpretation of Bishop Alexander there was absolute equality between God Creator and Wisdom (= the Word, identified as Jesus the Christ and son of God). Arius argued that as this Hikma, Wisdom or Christ was created and therefore lower in status than the Lord. This was the beginning of a debate that leaded to the Council of Nicea. Arius had two important supporters, both with the name of Eusebius: 1. Eusebius of Nicomedia (a small town close to Istanbul/Constantinople, on the Asian side of the Bosporus); 2. Eusebius of Caesarea in Palestine.
The emperor Constantine wanted to have unity in the empire also in the field of religion. Therefore he called for a meeting, a council in Nicea (some 80 km from Constantinople, in the Asian side of what is now Turkey). Arius was condemned. The two bishops with the name of Eusebius signed his condemnation although they still continued support for him. Arius was sent into exile for two years. But in 327 he wrote a milder version, some kind of compromise text between the creed of Nicea and his own opinion and he was again accepted as a leading priest in Alexandria. In 335 his creed was accepted by a great conference of bishops in Jerusalem. Arius died in 336.

In his study the archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams makes some important remarks about Arius. First, there were more conflicts than just the doctrinal ones. The were after the persecutions problems about positions of power in the church, now supported by the emperor Constantine. There were also conflicts about houses, money. Second, The whole debate was still in full development and some people held extreme ideas. The time was not yet ripe in 325 to make a good decision about this idea, but for political reasons, the emperor Constantine (not yet baptised as a Christian, but opting for a strong support from the Christians in his policy for his empire). Later in the 4th century the most debated word of homoóusios 'identical in being' was  put aside because it was not in the gospels and in fact quite strange. There was never a unified faction or Arian party, fighting orthodoxy. In fact Arius died in harmony with the church of Alexandria (which was divided over many other issues; Athanasius was five times expelled out of the town).
In the further history there were movement of Unitarians who rejected any idea of a triune God. But never in this book by Rowan Williams any connections is made between Muslims and Arians: Muslims are not mentioned at all in this debate! Wiliams himself seems to have accepted the history of the Christian doctrine and does not fight it.