325 A.D. The First Council of Nicea
At stake in the church's first general council was the simplest, yet most profound, question: Who is Jesus Christ?
July 4, 325, was a memorable day. About three hundred
Christian bishops and deacons from the eastern half of the Roman Empire
had come to Nicea, a little town near the Bosporus Straits flowing
between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean.
In the conference hall where they waited was a table. On it lay an open copy of the Gospels.
The emperor, Constantine the Great, entered the hall in
his imperial, jewel-encrusted, multicolored brocades, but out of respect
for the Christian leaders, without his customary train of soldiers.
Constantine spoke only briefly. He told the churchmen they had to come
to some agreement on the crucial questions dividing them. “Division in
the church,” he said, “is worse than war.”
A New Day
The bishops and deacons were deeply impressed. After
three centuries of periodic persecutions instigated by some Roman
emperor, were they actually gathered before one not as enemies but as
allies? Some of them carried scars of the imperial lash. One pastor from
Egypt was missing an eye; another was crippled in both hands as a
result of red-hot irons.
But Constantine had dropped the sword of persecution in
order to take up the cross. Just before a decisive battle in 312, he had
converted to Christianity.
Nicea symbolized a new day for Christianity. The
persecuted followers of the Savior dressed in linen had become the
respected advisers of emperors robed in purple. The once-despised
religion was on its way to becoming the state religion, the spiritual
cement of a single society in which public and private life were united
under the control of Christian doctrine.
If Christianity were to serve as the cement of the
Empire, however, it had to hold one faith. So the emperors called for
church councils like Nicea, paid the way for bishops to attend, and
pressed church leaders for doctrinal unity. The age of Christian
emperors was an age of creeds; and creeds were the instruments of
conformity.
A Troubling Question
We can see this imperial pressure at work at Nicea, the
first general council of the church. The problem that Constantine
expected the bishops to solve was the dispute over Arianism.
Arius, pastor of the influential Baucalis Church in
Alexandria, Egypt, taught that Christ was more than human but something
less than God. He said that God originally lived alone and had no Son.
Then he created the Son, who in turn created everything else. The idea
persists in some cults today.
Arius made faith in Christ understandable, especially
when he put his teaching in witty rhymes set to catchy tunes. Even the
dockhands on the wharves at Alexandria could hum the ditties while
unloading fish.
Arius’s teaching held a special appeal for many recent
converts to Christianity. It was like the pagan religions of their
childhood: the one supreme God, who dwells alone, makes a number of
lesser gods who do God’s work, passing back and forth from heaven to
earth. These former pagans found it hard to understand the Christian
belief that Christ, the Divine Word, existed from all eternity, and that
he is equal to the Almighty Father. So Arianism spread, creating
Constantine’s concern.
The Council of Nicea was summoned by Emperor Constantine
and held in the imperial palace under his auspices. Constantine viewed
the Arian teachings—that Jesus was a created being subordinate to God—as
an “insignificant” theological matter. But he wanted peace in the
Empire he had just united through force. When diplomatic letters failed
to solve the dispute, he convened around 220 bishops, who met for two
months to hammer out a universally acceptable definition of Jesus
Christ.
In the course of the debate, the most learned bishop
present, the church historian Eusebius of Caesarea (a friend and admirer
of the emperor and a half-hearted supporter of Arius), put forward his
own creed—perhaps as evidence of his questioned orthodoxy.
Most of the pastors, however, recognized that something
more specific was needed to exclude the possibility of Arian teaching.
For this purpose they produced another creed, probably from Palestine.
Into it they inserted an extremely important series of phrases: “True
God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father.…”
The expression homo ousion, “one substance,”
was probably introduced by Bishop Hosius of Cordova (in today’s Spain).
Since he had great influence with Constantine, the imperial weight was
thrown to that side of the scales.
After extended debate, all but two bishops at the
council agreed upon a creed that confessed faith “in one Lord Jesus
Christ, … true God of true God.” Constantine was pleased, thinking the
issue was settled.
An Unsettled Issue
As it turned out, however, Nicea alone settled little.
For the next century the Nicene and the Arian views of Christ battled
for supremacy. First Constantine and then his successors stepped in
again and again to banish this churchman or exile that one. Control of
church offices too often depended on control of the emperor’s favor.
The lengthy struggle over imperial power and theological
language culminated in the mid-fifth century at the Council at
Chalcedon in Asia Minor (today’s Turkey). There the church fathers
concluded that Jesus was completely and fully God. And finally, the
council confessed that this total man and this total God was one
completely normal person. In other words, Jesus combined two natures,
human and divine, in one person.
This classical, orthodox affirmation from Chalcedon made
it possible to tell the story of Jesus as good news. Since Jesus was a
normal human being, bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh, he could
fulfill every demand of God’s moral law, and he could suffer and die a
real death. Since he was truly God, his death was capable of satisfying
divine justice. God himself had provided the sacrifice.
The Council of Nicea, then, laid the cornerstone for the
orthodox understanding of Jesus Christ. That foundation has stood ever
since.
Dr. Bruce L. Shelley is professor of church history at Denver Seminary and a member of the advisory board of Christian History
No comments:
Post a Comment