First Council of Nicaea

The First Council of Nicaea, convoked by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in 325, was the first ecumenicalEcumenical, from Koine Greek oikoumenikos, literally meaning worldwide but generally assumed to be limited to the Roman Empire as in Augustus' claim to be ruler of the oikoumene/world; the earliest extant uses of the term for a council are Eusebius' Life of Constantine 3.6around 338 "" (he convoked an Ecumenical council), Athanasius' Ad Afros Epistola Synodica in 369 Pope Damasus I and the Latin bishops from the First Council of Constantinople[http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-14/Npnf2-14-63.htm#TopOfPage" target="_blank" >^* conference of bishops of the Christian Church.

The purpose of the council (also called a synod) was to resolve disagreements in the Church of Alexandria over the nature of Jesus in relationship to the Father; in particular, whether Jesus was of the same or of similar substance as God the Father. St. Alexander of Alexandria took the first position; the popular presbyter Arius, from whom the term Arian controversy comes, took the second. The council decided against the Arians overwhelmingly (of the estimated 250-318 attendees, all but 2 voted against the Arians). Another result of the council was an agreement on the date of the Christian Passover, now called Easter, the most important feast of the Church's life. The council decided in favour of celebrating Passover on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the vernal equinox, independently of the Bible's Hebrew Calendar (see also Quartodecimanism), and authorized the Bishop of Alexandria (presumably using the Alexandrian calendar) to announce annually the exact date to his fellow bishops.

The Council of Nicaea was historically significant because it was the first effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all of Christendom.Richard Kieckhefer (1989). "Papacy". Dictionary of the Middle Ages. ISBN 0684182750 "It was the first occasion for the development of technical Christology." Further, "Constantine in convoking and presiding over the council signaled a measure of imperial control over the church." With the creation of the Nicene Creed, a precedent was established for subsequent general councils to create a statement of belief and canons which were intended to become guidelines for doctrinal orthodoxy and a source of unity for the whole of Christendom — a momentous event in the history of the Church and subsequent history of Europe.

Character

The first Council of Nicaea was the first general gathering of bishops from the whole Church, to resolve differences of faith that had arisen and to define clearly the faith received from the apostles. It was “the first in the history of the Church since the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem which had established the basis for joining Gentiles to the Mystical Body of Christ.”Carroll, 11 In the Council of Nicaea, “the Church had taken her first great step to define revealed doctrine more precisely in response to a challenge from a heretical theology.”Carroll, 12 The resolutions in the council, being ecumenical, were intended for the whole Church. The council was recommended by a synod convened by the 68 year old Hosius of Cordoba in the Eastertide of 325, after investigating the trouble brought about by the Arian controversy in the Greek-speaking east.Carroll, 10 To many bishops, the teachings of Arius was heretical and a danger to the salvation of souls; to Constantine, any division in the Church was a threat to the unity of the Roman Empire. In the summer of 325, the bishops of all provinces were summoned to Nicaea in Bithynia, a place easily accessible to the majority of them, particularly those of Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Greece, and Thrace.

Attendees

Constantine had invited all 1800 bishops of the Christian church (about 1000 in the east and 800 in the west). However, only 250 to 320 bishops were able to participate. Eusebius of Caesarea counted 250, Athanasius of Alexandria counted 318,Ad Afros Epistola Synodica 2 and Eustathius of Antioch counted 270Theodoret H.E. 1.7 (all three were present at the council). Later, Socrates Scholasticus recorded more than 300,H.E. 1.8 and Evagrius,H.E. 3.31 Hilarius,Contra Constantium JeromeChronicon and Rufinus recorded 318.

The participating bishops were given free travel to and from their episcopal sees to the council, as well as lodging. These bishops did not travel alone; each one had permission to bring with him two presbyters and three deacons; so the total number of attendees would have been above 1500. Eusebius speaks of an almost innumerable host of accompanying priests, deacons, and acolytes.

A special prominence was also attached to this council because the persecution of Christians had just ended with the February 313 Edict of Milan by Emperors Constantine and Licinius.

The Eastern bishops formed the great majority. Of these, the first rank was held by the three archbishops: Alexander of Alexandria, Eustathius of Antioch, and Macarius of Jerusalem. Many of the assembled fathers — for instance, Paphnutius of Thebes, Potamon of Heraclea and Paul of Neocaesarea — had stood forth as witnesses of the faith, and came to the council with the marks of persecution on their faces. Other remarkable attendees were Eusebius of Nicomedia, Eusebius of Caesarea, Nicholas of Myra, Aristakes of Armenia, Jacob of Nisibis, a former hermit and Spyridion of Trimythous who even while a bishop made his living as a shepherd. From foreign places there came a Persian bishop John, a Gothic bishop Theophilus and Stratophilus, bishop of Pitiunt in Egrisi (located at the border of modern-day Russia and Abkhazia outside of the Roman Empire).

The Latin-speaking provinces sent at least five representatives: Marcus of Calabria from Italia, Cecilian of Carthage from Africa, Hosius of Córdoba from Hispania, Nicasius of Dijon from Gaul, and Domnus of Stridon from the province of the Danube. Pope Silvester I declined to attend, pleading infirmity, but he was represented by two priests.

Athanasius of Alexandria, a young deacon and companion of Bishop Alexander of Alexandria, was among these assistants. Athanasius eventually spent most of his life battling against Arianism. Alexander of Constantinople, then a presbyter, was also present as representative of his aged bishop.

“Resplendent in purple and gold, Constantine made a ceremonial entrance at the opening of the council, probably in early June, but respectfully seated the bishops ahead of himself.”Carroll, 11 He was present as an observer, but he did not vote. Constantine organized the Council along the lines of the Roman Senate. “Ossius ^* presided over its deliberations; he probably, and the two priests of Rome certainly, came as representatives of the Pope."Carroll, 11 “Eusebius of Nicomedia probably gave the welcoming address."Carroll, 11

Agenda and procedure

The agenda of the synod were:

The Arian question;
The celebration of Passover;
The Meletian schism;
The Father and Son one in purpose or in person;
The baptism of heretics;
The status of the lapsed in the persecution under Licinius.

The council was formally opened May 20, in the central structure of the imperial palace, with preliminary discussions on the Arian question. In these discussions, some dominant figures were Arius, with several adherents. “Some twenty-two of the bishops at the council, led by Eusebius of Nicomedia, came as supporters of Arius. But when some of the more shocking passages from his writings were read, they were almost universally seen as blasphemous.”Carroll, 11 Bishop Theognis of Nice and Bishop Maris of Chalcedon were among the initial supporters of Arius.

Eusebius of Caesarea called to mind the baptismal creed (symbol) of his own diocese at Caesarea in Palestine, as a form of reconciliation. The majority of the bishops agreed with him. For some time, scholars thought that the original Nicene Creed was based on this statement of Eusebius. Today, most scholars think that this Creed is derived from the baptismal creed of Jerusalem, as Hans Lietzmann proposed. Another possibility is the Apostle's Creed.

In any case, as the council went on, the orthodox bishops won approval of every one of their proposals. After being in session for an entire month, the council promulgated on June 19 the original Nicene Creed. This profession of faith was adopted by all the bishops “but two from Libya who had been closely associated with Arius from the beginning.”Carroll, 12

Arian controversy

The Arian controversy was a Christological dispute that began in Alexandria between the followers of Arius, the Arians; the followers of St. Alexander of Alexandria, known as homoousians; and a third group, known as homoiousians. Alexander and his followers believed that the Son was of the same substance as the Father, co-eternal with him. The Arians believed that they were different and that the Son, though he may be the most perfect of creations, was only a creation. Homoiousians tried to make a compromise position, saying that the Father and the Son were of similar substance.

Much of the debate hinged on the difference between being "born" or "created" and being "begotten". Arians saw these as the same; followers of Alexander did not. Indeed, the exact meaning of many of the words used in the debates at Nicaea were still unclear to speakers of other languages; Greek words like "essence" (ousia), "substance" (hypostasis), "nature" (physis), "person" (prosopon) bore a variety of meanings drawn from pre-Christian philosophers, which could not but entail misunderstandings until they were cleared up. The word homoousia, in particular, was initially disliked by many bishops because of its associations with Gnostic heretics (who used it in their theology), and because it had been condemned at the 264-268 Synods of Antioch.

Homoousians believed that to follow the Arian view destroyed the unity of the Godhead, and made the Son unequal to the Father, in contravention of the Scriptures ("The Father and I are one", ). Arians, on the other hand, believed that since God the Father created the Son, he must have emanated from the Father, and thus be lesser than the Father, in that the Father is eternal, but the Son was created afterward and, thus, is not eternal. The Arians likewise appealed to Scripture, quoting verses such as : "the Father is greater than I". Homoousians countered the Arians' argument, saying that the Father's fatherhood, like all of his attributes, is eternal. Thus, the Father was always a father, and that the Son, therefore, always existed with him.

The Council declared that the Father and the Son are of the same substance and are co-eternal, basing the declaration in the claim that this was a formulation of traditional Christian belief handed down from the Apostles. This belief was expressed in the Nicene Creed.

The Nicene Creed

By and large, many creeds were acceptable to the members of the council. From his perspective, even Arius could cite such a creed.

For Bishop Alexander and others, however, greater clarity was required. Some distinctive elements in the Nicene Creed, perhaps from the hand of Hosius of Cordova, were added.

Jesus Christ is described as "God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God," confirming his divinity. When all light sources were natural, the essence of light was considered to be identical, regardless of its form.
Jesus Christ is said to be "begotten, not made," asserting his co-eternalness with God, and confirming it by stating his role in the Creation.
Finally, he is said to be "from the substance of the Father," in direct opposition to Arianism. Some ascribe the term Consubstantial, i.e., "of the same substance" (of the Father), to Constantine who, on this particular point, may have chosen to exercise his authority.

Of the third article only the words "and in the Holy Spirit" were left; the original Nicene Creed ended with these words. Then followed immediately the canons of the council. Thus, instead of a baptismal creed acceptable to both the homoousian and Arian parties, as proposed by Eusebius, the council promulgated one which was unambiguous in the aspects touching upon the points of contention between these two positions, and one which was incompatible with the beliefs of Arians. From earliest times, various creeds served as a means of identification for Christians, as a means of inclusion and recognition, especially at baptism. In Rome, for example, the Apostles' Creed was popular, especially for use in Lent and the Easter season. In the Council of Nicaea, one specific creed was used to define the Church's faith clearly, to include those who professed it, and to exclude those who did not.

The text of this profession of faith is preserved in a letter of Eusebius to his congregation, in Athanasius, and elsewhere. Although the most vocal anti-Arians, the Homoousians (from the Koine Greek word translated as "of same substance" which was condemned at the Council of Antioch in 264-268), were in the minority, the Creed was accepted by the council as an expression of the bishops' common faith and the ancient faith of the whole Church.

Bishop Hosius of Cordova, one of the firm Homoousians, may well have helped bring the council to consensus. At the time of the council, he was the confidant of the emperor in all Church matters. Hosius stands at the head of the lists of bishops, and Athanasius ascribes to him the actual formulation of the creed. Great leaders such as Eustathius of Antioch, Alexander of Alexandria, Athanasius, and Marcellus of Ancyra all adhered to the Homoousian position.

In spite of his sympathy for Arius, Eusebius of Caesarea adhered to the decisions of the council, accepting the entire creed. The initial number of bishops supporting Arius was small. After a month of discussion, there were only two left: Theonas of Marmarica in Libya, and Secundus of Ptolemais. Maris of Chalcedon, who initially supported Arianism, agreed to the whole creed. Similarly, Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nice also agreed, except for the certain statements.

The emperor carried out his earlier statement: everybody who refuses to endorse the Creed will be exiled. Arius, Theonas, and Secundus refused to adhere to the creed, and were thus exiled aside from being excommunicated. The works of Arius were ordered to be confiscated and consigned to the flames, although there is no evidence that this occurred. Nevertheless, the controversy, already festering, continued in various parts of the empire.

Separation of Easter from the Jewish Passover

After the June 19 settlement of the most important topic, the question of the date of the Christian Passover (Easter), was brought up. This feast is linked to the Jewish Passover, as crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus occurred during that festival. By the year 300, most Churches had adopted the Western style of celebrating the feast on the Sunday after the Passover, placing the emphasis on the resurrection, which occurred on a Sunday. Others however celebrated the feast on the 14th of the Jewish month Nisan, the date of the crucifixion according to the Bible's Hebrew calendar (,). Hence this group was called Quartodecimans, which is derived from the Latin for 14. The Eastern Churches of Syria, Cilicia, and Mesopotamia determined the date of Christian Passover in relation to the 14th day of Nisan, in the Bible's Hebrew calendar. Alexandria and Rome, however, followed a different calculation, attributed to Pope Soter, so that Christian Passover would never coincide with the Jewish observance and decided in favour of celebrating on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the vernal equinox, independently of the Bible's Hebrew calendar.

According to Duchesne,Revue des questions historiques, xxviii. 37 who founds his conclusions:

on the conciliar letter to the Alexandrians preserved in Theodoret;Hist. eccl., I., ix. 12; Socrates, Hist. eccl., I., ix. 12
on the circular letter of Constantine to the bishops after the council;Eusebius, Vita Constantine, III., xviii. 19; Theodoret, Hist. eccl., I., x. 3 sqq.
on Athanasius;De Synodo, v.; Epist. ad Afros, ii.

Epiphanius of Salamis wrote in the mid-4th Century, "… the emperor … convened a council of 318 bishops … in the city of Nicea. … They passed certain ecclesiastical canons at the council besides, and at the same time decreed in regard to the Passover that there must be one unanimous concord on the celebration of God's holy and supremely excellent day. For it was variously observed by people…"Epiphanius, The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Books II and III (Sects 47-80), De Fide. Section VI, Verses 1,1 and 1,3. Translated by Frank Williams. EJ Brill, New York, 1994, pp.471-472).

The council assumed the task of regulating these differences, in part because some dioceses were determined not to have Christian Passover correspond with the Jewish calendar. "The feast of the resurrection was thenceforth required to be celebrated everywhere on a Sunday, and never on the day of the Jewish passover, but always after the fourteenth of Nisan, on the Sunday after the first vernal full moon. The leading motive for this regulation was opposition to Judaism, which had dishonored the passover by the crucifixion of the Lord." Constantine wrote that: "… it appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy feast we should follow the practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul. … Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Saviour a different way." Theodoret recorded the Emperor as saying: "It was, in the first place, declared improper to follow the custom of the Jews in the celebration of this holy festival, because, their hands having been stained with crime, the minds of these wretched men are necessarily blinded. … Let us, then, have nothing in common with the Jews, who are our adversaries. … avoiding all contact with that evil way. … who, after having compassed the death of the Lord, being out of their minds, are guided not by sound reason, but by an unrestrained passion, wherever their innate madness carries them. … a people so utterly depraved. … Therefore, this irregularity must be corrected, in order that we may no more have any thing in common with those parricides and the murderers of our Lord. … no single point in common with the perjury of the Jews."

The Council of Nicaea, however, did not declare the Alexandrian or Roman calculations as normative. Instead, the council gave the Bishop of Alexandria the privilege of announcing annually the date of Christian Passover to the Roman curia. Although the synod undertook the regulation of the dating of Christian Passover, it contented itself with communicating its decision to the different dioceses, instead of establishing a canon. There was subsequent conflict over this very matter. See also Computus and Reform of the date of Easter.

Meletian Schism

The suppression of the Meletian schism was one of the three important matters that came before the Council of Nicaea. Meletius, it was decided, should remain in his own city of Lycopolis, but without exercising authority or the power to ordain new clergy; moreover he was forbidden to go into the environs of the town or to enter another diocese for the purpose of ordaining its subjects. Melitius retained his episcopal title, but the ecclesiastics ordained by him were to receive again the imposition of hands, the ordinations performed by Meletius being therefore regarded as invalid. Clergy ordained by Meletius were ordered to yield precedence to those ordained by Alexander, and they were not to do anything without the consent of Bishop Alexander. From the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Meletius.

In the event of the death of a non-Meletian bishop or ecclesiastic, the vacant see might be given to a Meletian, provided he were worthy and the popular election were ratified by Alexander. As to Meletius himself, episcopal rights and prerogatives were taken from him. These mild measures, however, were in vain; the Meletians joined the Arians and caused more dissension than ever, being among the worst enemies of Athanasius. The Meletians ultimately died out around the middle of the fifth century.

Effect of the council

The long-term effects of the Council of Nicaea were significant. For the first time, representatives of all of the bishops of the Church convened to agree on a doctrinal statement. Also for the first time, the Emperor played a role, by calling together the bishops under his authority, and using the power of the state to give the Council's orders effect. This was the start of the Constantinian shift, an entangling of church and state that still gives rise to debate today.

In the short-term, however, the council did not completely solve the problems it was convened to discuss. The Arians and the Meletians soon regained nearly all the rights they had lost, and Arianism continued to spread and to cause division in the Church during the remainder of the fourth century. Almost immediately, Eusebius of Nicomedia used his influence at court to sway Constantine's favor from the orthodox Nicene bishops to the Arians. Eustathius of Antioch was deposed and exiled in 330. Athanasius, who had succeeded Alexander as bishop of Alexandria, was deposed by the First Synod of Tyre in 335 and Marcellus of Ancyra followed him in 336. Arius himself returned to Constantinople to be readmitted into the Church, but died shortly before he could be received. Constantine died the next year, after finally receiving baptism, from an Arian bishop, and "with his passing the first round in the battle after the Council of Nicaea was ended."Leo Donald Davis, S.J., "The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787)", 77, ISBN 0814656161

References in popular culture

The First Council began achieving a great deal of notoriety in 2003, after it was referred to in Dan Brown's controversial bestselling novel The Da Vinci Code. The novel's claim, via a key conversation between characters Leigh Teabing and Sophie Neveu, was that "until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by his followers as a mortal prophet... a great and powerful man, but a man nonetheless. A mortal. ^* establishment as 'the Son of God' was officially proposed and voted on by the Council of Nicaea." The book went on to state that Jesus' divinity was the result of a vote at the Council, and "a relatively close vote at that." The novel claims that Emperor Constantine convened and influenced this vote in order to help consolidate his own power.

In reality, the novel's claims have little basis in fact and are not accepted by any serious historians, who point out multiple examples indicating that Jesus' divinity was asserted almost immediately after his death by the apostles. Contemporary secular historian Pliny the Younger documented observations of Christians, who "sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god". The commonly-accepted view by most historians is that Constantine did convene the Council to help bring about peace and, in order to achieve that political goal, to clarify some diverging views about Jesus (such as whether or not he was "made" or "begotten"), but that there were no "votes" at the Council -- it was more of a discussion, to produce a written "Creed of Nicaea", which was then signed by all but two of the hundreds of participants.

Nevertheless, controversy around the pseudohistorical novel (which claimed to be presenting "facts" about history) has sparked a number of books, television documentaries, and statements by the church, to debate and debunk its various claims.

Notes

Bibliography

Primary sources

Eusebius of Caesarea, Letter of Eusebius of Cæsarea to the people of his Diocese Account of the Council of Nicea; The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine Book 3, Chapters VI-XXI treat the First Council of Nicaea.
Athanasius of Alexandria, Defence of the Nicene Definition; Ad Afros Epistola Synodica
Eustathius of Antioch, Letter recorded in Theodoret H.E. 1.7

Secondary sources

Carroll, Warren H., The Building of Christendom, 1987, ISBN 0-931888-24-7
Davis, S.J., Leo Donald, The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787), 1983, ISBN 0814656161
Kelly, J.N.D., The Nicene Crisis in Early Christian Doctrines, 1978, ISBN 006064334X
Kelly, J.N.D., The Creed of Nicea in Early Christian Creeds, 1982, ISBN 058249219X
Newman, John Henry., The Ecumenical Council of Nicæa in the Reign of Constantine from Arians of the Fourth Century'', 1871
Rusch, William G. "The Trinitarian Controversy", Sources of Christian Thought Series, ISBN 0800614100
Schaff, Philip The first ecumenical council includes creed and canons of the council.
Socrates, Of the Synod which was held at Nicæa in Bithynia, and the Creed there put forth Book 1 Chapter 8 of his Ecclesiastical History, 5th century source.
Sozomen, Of the Council convened at Nicæa on Account of Arius Book 1 Chapter 17 of his Ecclesiastical History, a 5th century source.
Tanner S.J., Norman P., "The Councils of the Church: A Short History", 2001, ISBN 0-8245-1904-3
Theodoret, General Council of Nicæa Book 1 Chapter 6 of his Ecclesiastical History; The Epistle of the Emperor Constantine, concerning the matters transacted at the Council, addressed to those Bishops who were not present Book 1 Chapter 9 of his Ecclesiastical History, a 5th century source;

External links

Catholic Encyclopedia: First Council of Nicaea
The Road to Nicaea a descriptive overview of the events of the Council, by John Anthony McGuckin.
The Council of Nicaea and the Bible. This article deals with the legend that the canon of the bible was discussed at the council.
Nicaea in the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica

Gourt Home::Gourt :: First Council of Nicaea