In this work, Carlos Galvão-Sobrinho offers a new study on how the struggle between bishops over theological differences in the Arian controversy reshaped the nature of ecclesial power. One might think that the Arian controversy, arguably the defining theological debate in the history of the Christian religion (at least prior to the Reformation), had been exhausted for scholars. This work is not a theological one (although it fully fleshes out the differences and debates); rather, the study concerns itself with the changing roles and powerbase of bishops in the period. Galvão-Sobrinho presents the Arian controversy as a contest about the nature of episcopal authority and the effects on such leadership in the future. The study contextualizes and sheds new light on a topic long studied as primarily theological.

The work is divided into three parts of varying chapters. Chapters 1 and 2 cover the issues of disputes between bishops in the late third century. Without precise theological agreements, bishops found it easy to accuse others (or be accused) of heretical belief, but increasingly hard to prove. Galvão-Sobrinho demonstrates how bishops tended to debate and defer on complex topics. In the first chapter, an examination of Origen, he presents the conclusion that third-century theologians thought precise formulas to be impossible (17). Galvão-Sobrinho examines all of the recorded condemnations and depositions of bishops prior to the fourth century to find that only two were attacked for theological reasons. This evidence is included in a separate appendix with even more detail (161–162). Although a short part of the book, the information on pre-Nicaean episcopal authority and disputation sets up the changes to come.

Part 2 is the meat of the book. It covers the creation and first resolution of the controversy. In chapter 3, Galvão-Sobrinho scrutinizes the situation in Alexandria—how the priest Arius ran afoul of the Bishop Alexander and still gained such a following. Alexander was concerned about attacks on his leadership from multiple fronts (including the Meletians—a “church of the martyrs”) and was slow to respond to Arius. His first goal seems to have been to try and find a way to keep Arius in his fold of priests, reflecting the long-held model of disputation and unity (41). When this attempt failed, both sides turned to the populace of the city to shore up their support. Chapter 4 explores the new models of leadership which involved the people in the controversy. The attempts of Arius to spread his message through preaching and song are well-documented with examples of appeals to specific groups in Alexandria, including sailors, millers, muleteers, and virgins (57–61). Chapter 5 carries the controversy beyond Alexandria. Arius's attempts to win support around the Mediterranean, and Alexander's forceful condemnation of fellow bishops who supported Arius—in contrast to earlier models of episcopal deference—turned the dispute from a local affair into an empire-wide split with the potential to pull the newly powerful church apart. Galvão-Sobrinho examines each step which transgressed previous norms of episcopal interaction, carefully demonstrating how new models of leadership and authority emerged. With the increasing animosity and the arrival of Constantine in the East in 324, it is only fitting that imperial authority dominates chapter 6. Galvão-Sobrinho does an excellent job of contextualizing Constantine and his cautious approach to the controversy. The documentation of Ossius of Cordoba and the Synod of Antioch in 325 receives careful attention and frames the Council of Nicaea as particularly dangerous for traditional notions of authority (80–83). The work follows the threads which ultimately led to the idea that statements of faith could be created—though by authority, not consensus as previous bishops had always imagined. In giving up on consensus, bishops created unity by criminalizing dissent (91).

Part 3 traces the resulting change to the nature of episcopal authority from the Council of Nicaea. Chapter 7 covers the rest of Constantine's rule and explores the new relationship between authority and violence. Once it became clear that episcopal authority empowered bishops to use violence against their opponents, it also became normative that violence could be used against bishops (110–111). The career of Athanasius demonstrates this two-edged sword. Chapter 8 continues in this vein, documenting the “routinization of violence” (132). Galvão-Sobrinho summarizes the change: “The struggle to save souls was also a struggle for power inside and outside the church” (126). The narrative finishes with a consideration of how charitable projects—like those of Macedonius of Constantinople or Eusebius of Vercelli—were an outgrowth of episcopal attempts to create popular support for their authority which could be unleashed on opponents (148–154).

The book has several appendices covering the evidence for the period examined. These include third-century bishops deposed, workshops of Alexandria, the recall of Arius in 327–328, the timeline of Athanasius from 339–341, and others. They serve as supporting documentation for the work and fill out the context for understanding the thesis about power dynamics. Each chapter is thoroughly noted and the bibliography is extensive. The work itself is a dense, contextualized tome on the Arian controversy. One issue which arises tangentially again and again is that of class. Galvão-Sobrinho avoids making a class-based argument about the Arian movement, but it echoes through the work in interesting ways. Likewise, the work is not explicitly theological, but it does justice to issues of faith. Yet it is clear that Galvão-Sobrinho views the dispute as ultimately about the nature of power. Scholars with interests in the Arian dispute, roles of bishops, and the presence of violence in the ancient world will find the work useful and interesting. Select chapters could even be assigned to advanced undergraduates, as the work is an excellent example of how religious history can be properly contextualized to showcase the transformation of the ancient world in late antiquity.