This Is Really My Website Dot Com

Main Page Related Sites RSS Feed

Notes on Council of Nicea

6/8/2024

Council of Nicea

• Also, “Nicaea”.
• Also, “First Council of Nicea”.

Sources

• Mostly Philip Schaff’s History of the Christian Church, Volume III: Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity, A.D. 311-600.
  • Can find for free on https://ccel.org.
• Also memory from various lectures, podcasts, videos, etc.
  • Jordan Cooper, YouTube channel
  • Dividing Line podcast, found on sermonaudio.com
  • RTS on iTunes U, which I don’t think exists anymore.
• Random internet searches to fill in blanks.
• If it’s not obvious, bear in mind that I am not, by any means, an expert on this subject! I’m learning a lot of this along the way. I just think it’s interesting and I know it’s important.

Conspiracy theories about Nicea

• Myth: The council was put together by Constantine and invented deity of Christ, which was not believed before then.
  • Constantine called the council to resolve the controversy. He was very proactively involved, but he mostly wanted the controversy to end.
  • Novel beliefs (good or bad) never come out of councils because that’s not how councils work– Two or more viewpoints that already exist come together to discuss their differences. Arianism, Sabellianism, and Trinitarianism existed well before Nicea.
• Myth: Council decided which books to include and exclude from the New Testament canon.
  • The canon was not a topic at Nicea at all.
• Myth: Council suppressed dissent of widely-believed Arian beliefs.
  • The council essentially had no ability to do anything like this, and Arianism continued long after the council, leading Athanasius to be exiled from his own church three times for teaching Orthodoxy, and the phrase “Athanasius Contra Mundum”.

Controversies leading into the Council

Basic terms

• Theology proper means the study of God, as opposed to merely “theology” would could be anything related to God’s revelation.
• Christology is the study of the person and work of Christ.
  • This is a much larger topic than what we’re discussing today.
    • Nestorianism, Docetism
  • Some of the earliest controversies in the church involved Christology.
    • i.e., Docetism as discussed in John 1.
  • Very historical topic, and weirdly complicated. It’s essentially impossible to address Christology without talking about hundreds of years of history and arguments over language.
• A Trinitarian is a person that believes that the one being of God is equally shared among three persons. (One what and three whos.)
  • I assume everyone already knows this one. I recommend James Whites’ The Forgotten Trinity for a good book on the subject.
  • Trinitarianism is monotheistic by definition.
  • The economic trinity is the way that the persons in the trinity act in time/creation, or how we observe them outwardly.
    • The Father is the creator.
    • The Son is the redeemer.
    • The Spirit is the sanctifier.
  • The ontological trinity is the distinctions among the persons in themselves, regardless of how they relate to creation.
  • The entire purpose of Trinitarianism is to be thoroughly Biblical in our theology proper.
  • Language used by trinitiarians is not found in the Bible, but is intended to describe systematically what the Bible describes narratively.
• A Unitarian is a person that rejects the idea of the trinity and believes that God is unipersonal.
  • Rejects the distinction between being and person.
  • Unitarians usually (but not always) accuse trinitarians of being tritheists.
  • Accordingly, describe themselves as “absolute monotheists” or “true monotheists”.

Sabellianism

• Sabellianism (better known as “Modalism”) is a Unitarian belief that the Father, Son, and Spirit are simply “modes” in which God presents Himself.
  • There is no eternal distinction between persons.
  • Christ is essentially a face of God. The logos of John 1 was merely an idea before it “became flesh”.
  • The Spirit is merely God acting in time.

Arianism

• Just to get out of the way– No connection at all with the Aryan race or Nazism.
• Arius was a Unitarian reacting against Sabellianism.
  • He believed that Trinitarians were essentially Sabellians.
• Arius believed that Christ was created by the Father, and that the Father then created the universe through Christ.
  • But it’s quite a bit more complicated than just this. He had an odd way of thinking about divinity and the creator/creature distinction.
  • He did explicitly believe that there was a time that Christ did not exist.
  • His ideas were influenced by church father Origen (c185-c253), but Origen was considered to be a Trinitarian.
    • Sidenote: Origen was also known for allegorizing the Bible and is controversial even today.
  • Also influenced by Lucian of Antioch and Paul of Samosata.
    • (I know absolutely nothing about these two guys, tbh.)
• Arius’ teachings caused a lot of controversy.

Constantine

• First emperor to involve himself in the dealings of the church.
• Mostly interested in the political aspect of it. He didn’t want trouble in the church which would cause discord in the empire.
  • Not to say that he had no interest in religious aspect of it, but that he seemed to value peace over truth or any one side over the other.
  • “Discord in the church I consider more fearful and painful than any other war.”
• Didn’t seem to understand the problem. Thought it was just an argument over words.
  • Honestly, kind of easy to see why he thought that.
• First tried to resolve the problem by reconciling the two parties by letters.
• When that failed, he called together the first “ecumenical” council.
  • “Ecumenical” basically means the worldwide church.
    • Slightly different usage than we would say today
    • Though even then they wouldn’t have called this council “ecumenical”.

The Council

• Nicea was in Bithynia, which is present-day Turkey.
• Year 325.
  • This is the equivalent of 1066 for the church, so might want to remember that.
• Bishops across the empire were invited and were to bring two presbyters and three servants.
  • Including Arius.
  • 318 showed up, about 1/6th of all bishops of the empire.
  • Eastern/Greek far more strongly represented than Western/Latin.
  • Rome had two presbyters, but not their bishop, who was too old to travel to the council.
• Constantine was very involved in the council.

Attendees of the council.

• Orthodox party:
  • Alexander of Alexandria seemed to be the most important one at the time.
  • Athanasius.
    • Archdeacon at the time.
    • Probably the most important person in church history after the Apostolic period.
    • Very young during the time of the council, and seemingly very enthusiastic.
    • Probably not very involved in the actual council, as he was just accompanying Alexander.
  • Possibly Nicholas
    • This would be the same Saint Nicholas that became Santa Claus.
    • Not sure if he was there or not. Not mentioned by Athanasius. Not even mentioned by Schaff in this entire volume.
    • Known to be strong opponent of Arius.
    • Might have been in prison during the council for slapping Arius in the face, which would explain his absense.
• Arian party:
  • Arius
  • Arius’ entourage
• Majority there didn’t seem to understand the issue at their arrival, but leaned towards orthodoxy.
  • This includes Eusebius of Caesarea, the church historian, though he started out seemingly more friendly to Arianism.
    • Note that there’s another Eusebius that appears a little later called Eusebian of Nicomedia, who is an Arian, and sometimes semi-Arians are called Eusebians for this reason, which makes these terms a little confusing at times
• Some present there were survivors of persecution.
  • Paphnutius had had his right eye gouged out from persecution.

Direction and decision of the council

• At the beginning, the orthodox were in the minority.
• Didn’t take long before the council turned in favor of orthodox against the Arians.
• Arians proposed a creed which was signed by 18 people.
  • It was shredded by the council and 16 of the signers abandoned Arius.
• There was an effort to use a more vague creed (that already existed) that didn’t actually address the issue.
  • Basically a compromise, and one that the Arians were amenable to.
  • Most people liked it and were ready to compromise.
• Orthodox specifically wanted to use the term homo-ousios (meaning “same substance”).
  • Arians thought this term to be Sabellian and unscriptural.
    • “and materialistic” (Schaff), which I can only assume to mean that they think it’s using a physical description for God.
• Constantine favored using the word.
• A counter-creed was written, the primary intent of which was to establish the deity of Christ.
  • Deity of Holy Spirit not really addressed. Only mention is “We believe in the Holy Ghost”.
  • Almost all of the bishops subscribed to the new creed.
    • Not all were very happy about it.
    • Eusebius required a day to think it over.
• Arius and two of his supporters were the only ones who refused to sign.
  • Were banished as a result.
  • Arius’ books were burned and he was called an enemy of the church.
  • First time in history civil punishment was used against heresy.
• Council also addressed other issues.
  • Discipline
  • Time of Easter
  • Miletian schism in Antioch. (Over Arianism.)

Key parts of the Nicene Creed

• “Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father”
• Specifically the condemnation of Arianism, the last and most controversial part of the creed: “But those who say: ‘There was a time when he was not;’ and ‘He was not before he was made;’ and ‘He was made out of nothing,’ or ‘He is of another substance’ or ‘essence,’ or ‘The Son of God is created,’ or ‘changeable,’ or ‘alterable’– they are condemned by the holy catholic and apostolic Church.”

Aftermath

• Despite the decisive decision of the council, Arianism quickly dominated.
• New councils against Nicea, new creeds, new anathemas.
  • Arius is now aquitted of charge of heresy by a council in Jerusalem in 335.
• Some of the disputes became violent when bishop elections became contentious.
• Eusebius now opposed homo-ousios.

Fate of Arius

• Constantine canceled Arius’ exile.
• Received back into the church at Constantinople.
• Arius died unexpectedly in 336. Was over eighty years old.

Athanasius

• Became bishop of Alexandria after Alexander died.
• Held strongly to what is now called “Nicene Orthodoxy”.
• Refused to acknowledge Arius as a Christian.
• Condemned by the new Arian councils.
  • Accused of false accusation.
• Banished by Constantine to Gaul as a disturber of the peace.
• Unbashished after Constantine’s death.
  • Sidenote: Constantine was baptized shortly before death (common practice back then) by an Arian.
  • Received by people joyfully and held a council in Alexandria to reaffirm Nicene orthodoxy.

Conflict between East and West: It gets weird.

• Eastern Roman Empire is ruled by Constantine’s second son, Constantius, who was firmly Arian.
• Athanasius exiled again.
  • Bishop of Rome has another council to defend Athanasius.
• Western Roman Empire sided more with Nicene Orthodoxy.
• The emperors did not want conflict, so they called another council: Sardica in Illyria, 343 AD.
• The council was boycotted by the Arian bishops of the East because Athanasius was allowed to attend.
• Held a counter-council nearby in Philippolis, confirming previous Arian councils.
• Constantius is compelled to restore Athanasius by his brother Constans.
• After the death of Constans, he held some more councils and exiled Athanasius again, this time with an army of 5k soldiers during a service.
• A milder form of Arianism now dominates the Roman empire.
  • “Milder” because it now accepts homoi-ousias (“like subtance”) while rejecting homo-ousias (“same substance”).
• An Arian called Felix II becomes Bishop of Rome.
  • Athanasius says this happened “by antichristian wickedness”.
  • Considered by many Roman Catholics today to be an anti-pope.
  • But there seems to be dispute among Roman Catholics that he was really an Arian at all.
  • Seems to become orthodox before the end of his life, but by pressure rather than conviction.

Slow death of Arianism

• Divided into two factions:
  • Eusebian/Semi-Arian who believed in homoi-ousias.
    • Still saw homo-ousias as Sabellian.
    • Still didn’t like Athanasius.
    • Some were still essentially orthodox, but just did not like the term homo-ousias.
  • Arians who believed that the Son was of a different essence, unlike the Father, created out of nothing.
• They had more councils. They weren’t going to compromise with each other.

Death of Constantius

• Julian the Apostate becomes emperor. Unbanishes everyone (including Athanasius) in hopes that they would destroy each other.
• Then Athanasius is banished again briefly, and recalled.
• Christianity was now unified fighting against paganism, and Nicene orthodoxy slowly gained more influencce via more councils.
• But after Athanasius died (373), Arianism surged again.

Council of Constantinople, the Second Ecumenical Council.

• Gregory Nazianzen was a man who was faithful to the Nicene orthodoxy in Constantinople.
• Theodosius I becomes emperor, and he held to Nicene orthodoxy.
  • Threatens heretics with punishment.
• Raised Gregory Nazianzen to power.
• Drove Arians out of the capital.
• Calls a new council: Constantinople.
  • 150 bishops.
  • Latin church not represented at all.
• Nicene creed reaffirmed, with additions to the deity of the Holy Spirit.
  • HS is because of different controversies: Macedonianism and Pneumatoinachism
  • Greek church rejected “filioque”, meaning “from the Son”. They did not believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son,
• Arianism basically gone from the empire, but still persisted in barbarian lands.
  • Had basically inherited it from Rome, but it took awhile for it to die out.
  • Didn’t seem to understand it.

Later history

• Some form of Arianism never really went away.

Movements and people related to Arianism

• Modern Arians include the Watchtower Society (i.e., Jehovah’s Witnesses).
• Isaac Newton was almost an Arian. Didn’t have the same ideas of the Holy Spirit.
• Maybe John Milton?
  • I had never heard this before, but Schaff identifies him as having a view of the relations of the Father to the Son as similar to Arius.
• There are other groups that are kind of similar, but I hesitate to give labels unless I’m really sure:
  • Restoration Chuch (Sir Anthony Buzzard)
  • Unification Church (Moonies)
  • Socinians (a heretical fringe group that came up during the Reformation)
• Islam
  • Definitely not Arians, but the issue on Christ’s deity is nearly the same.
  • Islam’s view of Christ and Theology Proper is too complicated to talk about right now, but worth noting because it’s a related topic.
    • Mohammed didn’t seem to understand the doctrine of the Trinity.
    • Worship of Christ is considered “Shirk”, meaning “association”, and is the worst sin that can be committed.
    • Modern Muslims are explicitly unitarian.

Movements and people related to Modalism/Sabellianism

• Oneness Pentecostal
• Miguel Servetus

Other

• Unitarian Universalists
  • Have “Unitarian” in their name, but their beliefs are hard to nail down.
  • I don’t think they seem to have any theological distinctives except possibly some vague secular humanism.