User:Seltaeb Eht/sandbox

Background

Alexandrian controversies

The major impetus for the calling of the Council of Nicaea arose in a theological dispute among the Christian clergy of Alexandria concerning the nature of Jesus, his origin, and relation to God the Father. Scholars propose dates between 318 and 322 for the beginning of the dispute. The precise origins of the controversey are unclear, but the principal actors were Archbishop Alexander of Alexandria and the presbyter Arius. Arius' teachings are known partially from a few of his writing which survive, but principally from his opponents, primarily Alexander and Athanasius of Alexandria. Arius criticized Alexander's teachings on Christology; Alexander taught that Jesus as God the Son was eternally generated from from the Father, while Arius and his followers asserted that the Father alone was eternal, and that the Son was created or begotten by the Father, and thus had a defined point of origin and was subordinate to the Father. Arius accused Alexander of following the teachings of Sabellius, who taught that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were one person, rather than the view held throughout the east that they were distinct. Alexander called a local council of bishops from Egypt and Libya, which sided with Alexander's view. Arius refused to subscribe to the council's decision, and was he and several followers were excommunicated and exiled from Alexandria by Alexander. Arius then traveled to churches around the Roman east and wrote to bishops to gain support of his view. Among Arius' supporters were Eusebius of Nicomedia and Eusebius of Caesarea, and they advocated for his view and his restoration to the church in Alexandria. Alexander also circulated letters defending his own position.

Parallel to the theological controversey between Alexander and Arius was the Melitian schism in the Alexandrian church. Melitius, bishop of Lycopolis, had acted in the stead of the imprisoned bishop Peter I of Alexandria during the Diocletianic Persecution, but after Peter's death in 311 refused to give up his right to ordain clergy or recognize the authority of Peter's successors Achillas or Alexander.

Constantine and the calling of the council

In 324, the western Roman emperor Constantine defeated the eastern emperor Licinius and became the sole ruler of the Roman Empire. It was at this time that, likely from Eusebius of Nicomedia, he became aware of the controversey between Alexander and Arius. Constantine wrote a letter to the two, urging them to end their dispute and reconcile. This was not Constantine's first direct involvement in ecclesiastical controversey; he had previously attempted to resolve a schism over Donatism in North Africa, first appointing Miltiades, Bishop of Rome to hear the dispute (with the instruction "I do not wish you to leave schism or division of any kind anywhere.") and then calling the Synod of Arles#Council of Arles in 314.

Constantine's letter was carried to Alexandria by Bishop Hosius of Corduba as his representative. Hosius apparently then presided over a synod at Alexandria concerning the date of Easter, before calling a council of Eastern bishops in Antioch. This council endorsed Alexander's position and issuing a statement of faith that held that the Son was "begotten not from non-existence, but from the Father, not as made, but as genuine product" and contained anathemas against Arius. Eusebius of Caesaria was also temporarily excommunicated because of his contention that the Father and the Son were of two different natures.

The bishops were then to assemble Ancyra in Asia Minor for a "great and hierarchic council", either at their own impetus or Constantine's command. Constantine moved the council to Nicaea in Bithynia, a venue that would allow him to attend personally (due to its proximity to his capital at Nicomedia) and would allow easier access for bishops from throughout the empire. The emperor had also planned a commemoration of the twentieth year of his reign in Nicaea.

• Ayres, Lewis (2004). Nicaea and its Legacy: An Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology. Ediburgh: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9781139054133.
• Brent, Allen (2022). "Melitian Schism". In Louth, Andrew (ed.). The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780191744396.
• Cameron, Averil (2007). "Constantine and the 'peace of the church'". In Casiday, Augustine; Norris, Frederick W. (eds.). The Cambridge History of Christianity. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781108427746.
• Drake, H. A. (2021). "The Elephant in the Room: Constantine at the Council". In Kim, Young Richard (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781108427746.
• Edwards, Mark (2007). "The first Council of Nicaea". In Casiday, Augustine; Norris, Frederick W. (eds.). The Cambridge History of Christianity. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781108427746.
• Hanson, R. P. C. (1988). The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381. Ediburgh: T&T Clark. ISBN 0567094855.
• Kim, Young Richard (2021). "Introduction". In Kim, Young Richard (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781108427746.
• Lyman, Rebecca (2021). "Arius and Arianism". In Kim, Young Richard (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781108427746.
• Smith, Mark S. (2018). The Idea of Nicaea in the Early Church Councils, AD 431–451. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780198835271.
• Van Dam, Raymond (2021). "Imperial Fathers and Their Sons: Licinius, Constantine, and the Council of Nicaea". In Kim, Young Richard (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781108427746.

The Council

• Barnes, Timothy D. (1981). Constantine and Eusebius. Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0674165306.
• Gwyn, David M. (2021). "Reconstructing the Council of Nicaea". In Kim, Young Richard (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781108427746.
• Jacobs, Ine (2021). "Hosting the Council in Nicaea". In Kim, Young Richard (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781108427746.

Outcomes

Formulation of the Nicene Creed

Main article: Nicene Creed

Icon depicting the Emperor Constantine and the bishops of the First Council of Nicaea (325) holding the Niceno–Constantinopolitan Creed of 381

The council formulated a creed, a declaration and summary of the Christian faith. It takes the form of a "declaratory creed", designed to define the tenets of faith for believers to subscribe to, rather than a liturgical read meant to be recited together at worship. The original Nicene Creed read as follows:

Greek text	Translation
Πιστεύομεν εἰς ἕνα θεὸν, πατέρα, παντοκράτορα, πάντων ὁρατῶν τε καὶ ἀοράτων ποιητήν.	We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Μaker of all things both visible and invisible;
καὶ εἰς ἕνα κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν, τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, γεννηθέντα ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς, μονογενῆ, τουτέστιν ἐκ τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ πατρός, θεὸν ἐκ θεοῦ, φῶς ἐκ φωτός, θεὸν ἀληθινὸν ἐκ θεοῦ ἀληθινοῦ, γεννηθέντα οὐ ποιηθέντα, ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρί, δι’ οὗ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο τά τε ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ καὶ τὰ ἐν τῇ γῇ, τὸν δι’ ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν κατελθόντα καὶ σαρκωθέντα, ἐνανθρωπήσαντα, παθόντα καὶ ἀναστάντα τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ, ἀνελθόντα εἰς τοὺς οὐρανοὺς ἐρχόμενον κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς·	and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father, only-begotten, that is, from the substance of the Father; God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through whom all things came into being, both things in heaven and things on earth; who for us humans and for our salvation descended, became incarnate, was made human, suffered, on the third day rose again, ascended into the heavens, will come to judge the living and the dead];
καὶ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα.	and in the Holy Spirit.
τοὺς δὲ λέγοντας· ἦν ποτε, ὅτε οὐκ ἦν καὶ· Πρὶν γεννηθῆναι οὐκ ἦν, καὶ ὅτι ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων ἐγένετο ἢ ἐξ ἑτέρας ὑποστάσεως ἢ οὐσίας φάσκοντας εἶναι [ἢ κτιστὸν] ἢ τρεπτὸν ἥ ἀλλοιωτὸν τὸν υἱὸν θεοῦ, τούτους ἀναθεματίζει ἡ καθολικὴ καὶ ἀποστολική ἐκκλησία.	The catholic and apostolic Church anathematizes those who say, “There was when he was not,” and, “He was not before he was begotten,” and that he came to be from nothing, or those who claim that the Son of God is from another hypostasis or substance, (or created,) or alterable, or mutable.

The text was based on existing Christian creeds, possibly including baptismal creeds of Syria, Jerusalem, and Rome. Statements of faith by second-century church fathers Iraneus and Tertullian also contained similar language to the creed adopted by the council. The creed explicitly counters specific positions of Arius and his allies and anathematizes them.

Arius, Theonas of Marmarike, and Secundus of Ptolemais refused to subscribe to the creed and were excommunicated. Theognis of Nicaea and Eusebius of Nicomedia were also deposed as bishops. Eusebius felt the anathemas were too harsh, but he was restored once he accepted them.

Summarize Ayres pp84-100

Separation of Easter computation from Jewish calendar

The feast of Easter is linked to the Jewish Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread, as Christians believe that the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus occurred at the time of those observances. As early as Pope Sixtus I in the 2nd century, some Christians had set Easter to a Sunday in the lunar month of Nisan. To determine which lunar month was to be designated as Nisan, Christians relied on the Jewish community. By the late 3rd century some Christians began to express dissatisfaction with what they took to be the disorderly state of the Jewish calendar. They argued that contemporary Jews were identifying the wrong lunar month as the month of Nisan, choosing a month whose 14th day fell before the spring equinox.

Christians, these thinkers argued, should abandon the custom of relying on Jewish informants and instead do their own computations to determine which month should be styled Nisan, setting Easter within this independently computed, Christian Nisan, which would always locate the festival after the equinox. They justified this break with tradition by arguing that it was in fact the contemporary Jewish calendar that had broken with tradition by ignoring the equinox and that in former times the 14th of Nisan had never preceded the equinox. Others felt that the customary practice of reliance on the Jewish calendar should continue, even if the Jewish computations were in error from a Christian point of view.

The controversy between those who argued for independent computations and those who argued for continued reliance on the Jewish calendar was formally resolved by the Council, which endorsed the independent procedure that had been in use for some time at Rome and Alexandria. Easter was henceforward to be a Sunday in a lunar month chosen according to Christian criteria—in effect, a Christian Nisan—not in the month of Nisan as defined by Jews. Those who argued for continued reliance on the Jewish calendar (called "protopaschites" by later historians) were urged to come around to the majority position. That they did not all immediately do so is revealed by the existence of sermons, canons, and tracts written against the protopaschite practice in the late 4th century.

These two rules—independence of the Jewish calendar and worldwide uniformity—were the only rules for Easter explicitly laid down by the Council. No details for the computation were specified; these were worked out in practice, a process that took centuries and generated numerous controversies, some of which remain unresolved. In particular, the Council did not seem to decree that Easter must fall on Sunday. This was unnecessary as it resolved against the Quartodecimani, who celebrated on any day of the week, in favour of the Churches who postponed the celebration to the following Sunday. See the extract from the Letter of the Council of Nicaea to the Egyptian Church, cited above.

Nor did the Council decree that Easter must never coincide with Nisan 15 (the first Day of Unleavened Bread, now commonly called "Passover") in the Hebrew calendar. The Finnish Orthodox Church explains, "According to the definition of the Council of Nicaea in 325, Pascha is celebrated on the first Sunday after the full moon following the vernal equinox, but always after the Jewish Passover. The date of the vernal equinox was then defined as March 21." L'Huillier notes the success of this strategy - Orthodox Easter has never preceded Passover.

Resolution of the Melitian schism

The suppression of the Melitian schism, an early breakaway sect, was another important matter that came before the Council of Nicaea. Melitius, it was decided, should remain in his own city of Lycopolis in Egypt but without exercising authority or the power to ordain new clergy; 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 laying on of hands, the ordinations performed by Melitius being therefore regarded as invalid. Clergy ordained by Melitius were ordered to yield precedence to those ordained by Alexander, and they were not to do anything without the consent of Bishop Alexander.

In the event of the death of a non-Melitian bishop or ecclesiastic, the vacant see might be given to a Melitian, provided he was worthy and the popular election were ratified by Alexander. Melitius' episcopal rights and prerogatives were taken from him. These mild measures, however, were in vain; the Melitians joined the Arians and caused more dissension than ever, being among the worst enemies of Athanasius. The Melitians ultimately died out around the middle of the 5th century.

Promulgation of canon law

Main articles: Canon law, Collections of ancient canons, and Promulgation (Catholic canon law)

The Council promulgated twenty new church laws, called canons (though the exact number is subject to debate), that is, rules of discipline. The twenty as listed in the works of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers are as follows:

1. prohibition of self-castration for clergy
2. establishment of a minimum term for catechumens (persons studying for baptism)
3. prohibition of a man and a woman who have both taken vows of chastity to live together in a chaste and non-legalized partnership (the so called virgines subintroductae, who practiced syneisaktism)
4. ordination of a bishop in the presence of at least three provincial bishops and confirmation by the metropolitan bishop
5. provision for two provincial synods to be held annually
6. confirmation of ancient customs giving jurisdiction over large regions to the bishops of Alexandria, Rome, and Antioch
7. recognition of the honorary rights of the see of Jerusalem
8. provision for agreement with the Novatianists, an early sect
9. elders who had been ordained without sufficient examination were not to be recognized
10. elders who had lapsed but had not been found out were to be deposed
11. mercy was enjoined toward those who had lapsed without compulsion, even though it was recognized that they did not deserve it
12. those who had left the military but later sought out to be restored to their military position were to be excommunicated; depending on the sincerity of their repentance, they could be readmitted to communion earlier
13. those who were fulfilling penance could receive communion if they were dying, but if they got well again, they were to finish their penance
14. catechumens who lapsed were to have three years as hearers before being allowed to become catechumens again
15. bishops, presbyters, and deacons were not to wander into neighboring cities to officiate
16. clergy who refused to return to their home church were to be excommunicated, and the ordinations of those who were ordained by these wandering clergy were to be considered null and void
17. prohibition of usury among the clergy
18. precedence of bishops and presbyters before deacons in receiving the Eucharist (Holy Communion)
19. declaration of the invalidity of baptism by Paulian heretics
20. prohibition of kneeling on Sundays and during the Pentecost (the fifty days commencing on Easter). Standing was the normative posture for prayer at this time, as it still is among the Eastern Christians. Kneeling was considered most appropriate to penitential prayer, as distinct from the festive nature of Eastertide and its remembrance every Sunday. The canon was designed only to ensure uniformity of practice at the designated times.

• Anatolios, Kahled (2011). Retrieving Nicaea: The Development and Meaning of Trinitarian Doctrine. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. ISBN 9780801031328.
• Edwards, Mark (2021). "The Creed". In Kim, Young Richard (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781108427746.
• McCarthy, Daniel P. (2021). "The Council of Nicaea and the Celebration of the Christian Pasch". In Kim, Young Richard (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781108427746.

Reception and Legacy

References