"ARIANS" (HOMOIANS) AND NICEANS

What we call sometimes Arianism, when it comes to the credo mostly followed by Barbarians in the Vth century, was significantly different from the actual Arianism of the IVth. Rather than denying the divinity of Christ, Homoians tought he was similar (hence their name) but subordinated to the Father, which is why they're called Subordinationists as well.

The name Arianism stuck because it was easier to attack Constantius II's subordinatism by mislabelling it. Barbarians still began to adopt it first to please the emperor, and then to distinguish themselves to Romans as they were increasingly romanised themselves (Burgondians first converting to a Nicean credo before adopting an Homousian credo). Eventually, we know the Gothic word for their credo, which is galeiks which is a direct translation of homoious.

There's few evidence on what Homoian's liturgy could have been like but what we have seems to indicate that differences were limited and both were close enough for followers of one credo to participate to religious service with followers of the other (altough it might have been frowned upon depending on the situation).

We know Homoians had their own saints, that common saints were celebrated at different dates and with a possibly different calendar. It's also probable that they treated sainthood differently from Niceans, being careful not to associate them to God and possibly frowning upon cult of saints and their relics. At the very least, many Nicean theologians seemed to think veneration of saints was a useful and good practice against Homoians.

They were as well singing different hymns, more or less limited use of Germanic language during service (while these languages tended to disappear very quickly from everyday use) and especially in their translations of the Bible altough they probably used Latin scripture too (there's no indication both differed from each other : it's not even a given that Ulfila was Homoian) and a good part of "me no speak Latin" arguments were blatantly false.

If we scrap the barrel, use and number of chalices might be noted altough it was probably not restricted to Homoians.
Some different rituals seems to have been attempted, such as about the baptismal immersions and their numbers, but it never went anywhere.

Homoianism was tending on avoiding christologic debates for the sake of it as the divine nature couldn't be deducted or analysed. It had also the distinct advantages not to undergo a growingly tense relations with Niceans (contary to what happened in eastern Romania) and theological debates were more of a formality for the sake of entretainment in Barbarian Kingdoms.
Homoians also distinguished themselves with a greater biblical litteralism, and not following some organisational and theologica developments that appeared in Christianity after the IVth century.

Eventually, while differences existed, they were more about identities, organisations, and some theological principles few seem to have really cared about even in the clergy. These were real, and could cause social and political trouble (Vandals religious policies being a noted exception), but it's telling that a baptism under Homoian credo was considered legit enough by Niceans that you didn't need to redo it once converting.
Not that all Homoians were Barbarians in the beggining of the Vth century but both tended to be more and more synonymous, Homoianism eventually surviving apart as a political and identity feature firstmost.
This religious similarity and the political nature of the differenciation (Homoian kings took great care preserving the religious status-quo) does largely explain the absence of important tensions, exception made of Vandalic Africa.

As a Nicean Christian entering a Homoian church, you'd probably notice some differences there and there, but certainly be extremely familiar with the church or the liturgy, as it would be essentially the same than to yours.

​

Sources
- Arianism, Roman heresy and Barbarian creed, edited by Guido M. Brendt and Roland Steinarcher

- Les Racines Chrétiennes de l'Europe, conversion et liberté dans les Royaumes Barbares, Vème -VIIème siècle, Bruno Dumézil