HOME | DD

gromyko — The Councilors of Nicea left

Published: 2009-07-22 08:54:24 +0000 UTC; Views: 1700; Favourites: 27; Downloads: 37
Redirect to original
Description Left Wing Panel, 8.5x12in
Ink on Paper

Left wing of the triptych "The Councilors of Nicea"

for

The First Council of Nicaea is believed to have been the first Ecumenical council of the Christian Church. Most significantly, it resulted in the first uniform Christian doctrine, called the Creed of Nicaea. With the creation of the creed, a precedent was established for subsequent general (ecumenical) councils of Bishops (Synods) to create statements of belief and canons of doctrinal orthodoxy— the intent being to define unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom.

Derived from Greek oikoumenikos, "ecumenical" literally means "worldwide" but generally is 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 3.6 around 338 "σύνοδον οἰκουμενικὴν συνεκρότει" (he convoked an Ecumenical council), Athanasius' Ad Afros Epistola Synodica in 369, and the Letter in 382 to Pope Damasus I and the Latin bishops from the First Council of Constantinople.

The purpose of the council was to resolve disagreements arising from within the Church of Alexandria over the nature of Jesus in relationship to the Father; in particular, whether Jesus was the literal son of God or was he a figurative son, like the other "sons of God" in the Bible. St. Alexander of Alexandria and Athanasius 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 two voted against Arius).

Another result of the council was an agreement on when to celebrate the Resurrection, the most important feast of the ecclesiastical calendar. The council decided in favour of celebrating the resurrection on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the vernal equinox, independently of the Hebrew Calendar (see also Quartodecimanism and Easter controversy). It authorized the Bishop of Alexandria (presumably using the Alexandrian calendar) to announce annually the exact date to his fellow bishops.

Historically significant as the first effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all of Christendom, the Council was the first occasion for the development of technical Christology. Through it a precedent was set for subsequent general councils to adopt creeds and canons. This council is generally considered the beginning of the period of the First seven Ecumenical Councils in the History of Christianity.

The Agenda:

The agenda of the synod were:

1. The Arian question regarding the relationship between God the Father and Jesus; i.e. are the Father and Son one in purpose only or also one in being;
2. The date of celebration of the Paschal/Easter observation
3. The Meletian schism;
4. The validity of baptism by heretics;
5. 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 22 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."Bishops Theognis of Nicaea and 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. 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." No historical record of their dissent actually exists; the signatures of these bishops are simply absent from the creed.

The Controversy:

The Arian controversy was a Christological dispute that began in Alexandria between the followers of Arius (the Arians) and the followers of St. Alexander of Alexandria (now known as Homoousians). 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 of God the Father. A third group (now known as Homoiousians) later 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", John 10:30). 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 John 14:28: "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.
Related content
Comments: 4

SirNaelyan [2009-07-28 21:39:33 +0000 UTC]

That certainly looks like it took a while. I really enjoy how the figure appears to be masked, and how its hair flows like tentacles away from the body. Very nice.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

torVs [2009-07-24 03:07:15 +0000 UTC]

oist myko., anung meron dito tsong? na-copy paste mo yta sa ibang site, ang haba.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

gromyko In reply to torVs [2009-07-24 03:33:20 +0000 UTC]

huy nasa libro nako tingnan mo tingnan mo...ehem ehem...kamusta ba makati boy? di kanan limibot dito nagbukas ulit me ng inet shop...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Decarabia69 [2009-07-22 16:05:56 +0000 UTC]

Grom, I think you've turned off quite a few people who might have commented on this wonderful piece of art by delving into the history of the Nicean council. I do it often with my own comments that often center on political (and religious) tirades.

I did get a chuckle out of this:

"Derived from Greek oikoumenikos, "ecumenical" literally means "worldwide" but generally is assumed to be limited to the Roman Empire, "

IF the Bible is indeed the literal "word of God," and it was devised as a sort of spiritual instruction book on how to attain heaven, why wasn't it distributed throughout the world, instead of centering itself around the Roman empire?

How, in His wisdom, did God deem that western civilization was worthy of redemption before north and south America, the numerous Asian countries (yours included), the continent of Australia and even the north pole? If the Bible was meant for ALL MEN why was it entrusted to only a few?

I won't even bother asking where the Council of Nicea got their creditentials and what made them "experts" on what God intended.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0