Program / Course 8: God, Trinity, and Creation / Lesson 4.2
What you will learn
- Describe the setting, the participants and the main business of the Council of Nicaea.
- Explain what the creed of 325 said and which phrases answered Arius.
- Explain what homoousios means and why it was both useful and controversial.
- Identify what the council did and did not settle.
The big idea
In 325 the emperor Constantine summoned bishops from across the empire to the city of Nicaea to restore the unity of the church. The council condemned the teaching of Arius and issued a creed that said the Son is begotten of the Father, from the Father’s own substance, true God from true God, begotten and not made, and of one substance with the Father. The key word was homoousios. It was chosen because it excluded the Arian view in terms that could not be evaded, but it caused years of further dispute.
Key terms
- Ecumenical council
- A gathering of bishops from the whole church to decide matters of faith and discipline. Nicaea is counted as the first by Catholic, Orthodox and many Protestant churches.
- Homoousios
- A Greek word meaning of the same substance or being. Used to say the Son is of one being with the Father.
- Homoiousios
- A Greek word meaning of like substance. Used later by those who thought homoousios said too much.
- Anathema
- A formal condemnation. The Nicene Creed of 325 ended with anathemas against the main Arian slogans.
- Ousia
- A Greek word for being or substance. Its meaning in the fourth century was not fixed, which caused confusion.
- Hypostasis
- A Greek word that could mean substance or individual reality. In 325 it was used in the anathemas in a way close to ousia.
- Canon
- In this setting, a rule of church discipline issued by a council. Nicaea issued twenty.
- Constantine
- The Roman emperor from 306 to 337. He ended the persecution of Christians and became the first emperor to favor the church.
Background
By 324 Constantine had defeated his rival Licinius and ruled the whole Roman world. He found the Eastern church divided over Arius. He sent a letter to Alexander and Arius urging them to settle what he thought a small matter, and when this failed he summoned a council. It met in the summer of 325 in Nicaea, a city in what is now northwestern Turkey. The emperor paid for the bishops’ travel and attended the sessions. Traditionally about 318 bishops are counted, though ancient sources give differing figures, and most came from the East. Only a few came from the Latin West.
Before Nicaea, the church had never held a gathering of this kind. Local councils of bishops had met, but not a general council with imperial backing. This was both a gain and a danger: the church could speak with one voice, and it was now tied to the state. Historians debate how far Constantine shaped the result. Most hold that he supported the council in finding agreement, and that the substance of the creed came from the bishops.
Much of what is known about the proceedings comes from letters written after the event, especially a letter of Eusebius of Caesarea to his church and later writings of Athanasius, who was present as a young deacon in Alexander’s company. The records do not give a full account of the debate, and some popular stories about the council are legends. The main facts about the outcome are well attested.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: The business of the council
The council dealt with three main matters. It examined the teaching of Arius and condemned it. It set a common date for Easter, to end the practice of different churches observing it on different days. And it issued twenty canons on church order, covering such things as the ordination of bishops, the treatment of those who had lapsed in persecution, and the rights of the great sees of Alexandria, Rome and Antioch.
The most important task was to state the faith clearly enough to exclude Arius. An early proposal was to use only biblical language. Arius and his friends, however, were willing to accept the biblical phrases while reading them in their own way. So the council needed words that could not be read in an Arian sense.
Step 2: The creed of 325
The creed of 325 begins with belief in one God, the Father almighty, maker of all things. It then speaks of one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of 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; of one substance with the Father; through whom all things came to be. It then speaks of his coming down, his incarnation, suffering, resurrection and coming to judge. It says only that the believer trusts in the Holy Spirit, with nothing more about the third person, because the dispute was not about the Spirit.
Then followed anathemas against those who say there was when he was not, or that before he was begotten he was not, or that he came from nothing, or that he is of a different substance or essence, or is created, or changeable. Each of these lines is aimed at a phrase attributed to Arius. The creed was thus a set of answers, not an exhaustive account of the Son.
Step 3: The word homoousios
The word homoousios was not in Scripture. It was proposed, according to later testimony, with the support of Constantine and of Ossius of Cordoba, a Western bishop who had the emperor’s confidence. It means that the Son has the same being as the Father, not merely a similar being. A human son has the same nature as his father, and this was the sense intended. The Son is not a creature of a different kind, but is God in the same sense that the Father is God.
Many bishops hesitated. Some noted that the word had been used by Paul of Samosata, or by Sabellians, and had been rejected at Antioch around 268. Some feared that it implied that Father and Son were one individual, a Sabellian reading. Others said it was not found in the Bible. Eusebius of Caesarea accepted the word after receiving explanations that it meant only that the Son is from the Father and is unlike creatures. Most bishops signed. Arius and two Egyptian bishops did not and were sent into exile.
Step 4: What was and was not settled
Nicaea settled that the Son is not a creature and is of the same being as the Father. It did not settle the relationship between the three persons in detail, the meaning of ousia and hypostasis, the place of the Spirit, or how to treat those who disliked the word. For the next half-century the church argued about these points, and for a time the Arian side regained favor with the emperors. The council was not the end of the matter. It was the first reply.
Catholic, Orthodox and most Protestant churches regard Nicaea as binding on the main point. Over time the church came to see the council as a standard, and the Nicene Creed, in the enlarged form of 381, became the common creed of the churches. Some historians argue that the status of Nicaea as the definitive council grew during the century after it, and was not fully clear at the time.
- Why might the council have found it necessary to go beyond biblical words?
- What are the dangers of a church tied to the power of the state?
- Which phrase of the creed seems to me most clearly aimed at Arius?
- What does it mean to say the Son is begotten, not made?
- Why did some bishops hesitate over homoousios?
- What does the creed leave unsaid, and why?
Examples
Same nature, different person
A human father and son are both fully human. The son does not have a lesser kind of humanity. Homoousios uses this idea: the Son shares the nature of the Father fully. Like all analogies, it is imperfect, since human fathers and sons are separate individuals.
Begotten, not made
A carpenter makes a table from wood. The table is a different kind of thing from the carpenter. A father begets a child of his own kind. The creed uses the second picture to say that the Son comes from the Father in a way that is not creation.
Eusebius’s letter
Eusebius of Caesarea told his church that he had first proposed a creed of his own, which was approved, and that the council then added homoousios and the anathemas. He explained how he came to accept the changes. The letter is one of the main sources for the council and shows that even supporters needed convincing.
Different perspectives
Catholic
The Catholic Church counts Nicaea as the first ecumenical council and its creed as a binding definition. Catholic teaching holds that the council expressed the apostolic faith in new words to answer a new error. The role of the bishop of Rome at the council was small, as he sent two priests and was not present, but later Catholic doctrine stresses his confirmation of conciliar decisions.
Orthodox
The Orthodox churches honor Nicaea as the first of the seven ecumenical councils and celebrate the fathers who attended it. They stress conciliarity, the idea that the whole church speaks through the bishops. The Sunday of the Fathers of the First Council is kept in the Orthodox calendar.
Protestant
Lutheran, Reformed and Anglican confessions affirm Nicene teaching. The Reformers did not treat councils as infallible in themselves, and held that councils can err, but they considered Nicaea faithful to Scripture. Calvin and Luther both affirmed the Nicene doctrine of Christ.
Critical scholarship
Historians such as Hanson and Ayres show that the council’s immediate results were mixed. The language was contested for decades, and the dominant parties were not only Arian and Nicene but included many in between. Some scholars argue that Nicene orthodoxy was only established at Constantinople in 381, not in 325.
Popular myths
A common modern claim is that Nicaea chose the books of the Bible or voted Jesus into divinity. Historians reject both. The council did not discuss the canon of Scripture and did not first assert the divinity of Christ. It chose between two views of the Son’s relation to the Father.
Why it matters
Nicaea is the model of how the church answers an error: by finding words that exclude the error without claiming to explain the mystery. It also shows the cost, since the word chosen had to be defended for decades. A student who understands this gains a way of reading all the later creeds, and avoids the legends that surround the council.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: Constantine imposed his own view on the bishops.
Correction: Constantine encouraged agreement and supported the word homoousios. Historians doubt that he had a theological position of his own. The wording came from the bishops, and many continued to dispute it after he approved it.
Misunderstanding: The council decided which books belong in the Bible.
Correction: It did not. The formation of the New Testament canon was a longer process, and Nicaea’s records show no discussion of it.
Misunderstanding: Nicaea started belief in Christ’s divinity.
Correction: Christians had worshiped Christ and called him God long before 325. The council addressed a specific proposal that the Son is a creature. Its decision was about how to state what the church already confessed.
Misunderstanding: Homoousios means Father and Son are one individual.
Correction: That was the Sabellian fear, and the council did not intend it. The word means they share the same being. Later writers worked out the vocabulary to distinguish being from person.
Knowledge check
What three matters did the council deal with?
It condemned the teaching of Arius and issued a creed, it set a common date for Easter, and it issued twenty canons on church order. The creed was its most important act because it stated the faith in language that could not be read in an Arian sense.
What does homoousios mean, and why was it chosen?
It means of the same substance or being. It was chosen because Arius’s supporters could accept every biblical phrase while reading it their own way, but they could not accept this word. It stated that the Son is God in the same sense as the Father, not a creature of a different kind.
Why did some bishops hesitate about the word?
It was not found in Scripture, it had been used by Paul of Samosata and rejected at an earlier council at Antioch, and it could be read in a Sabellian sense, as if Father and Son were one individual. Most signed after explanations that it meant only that the Son is truly from the Father.
Did Nicaea settle the whole debate?
No. It settled that the Son is not a creature and is of one being with the Father, but left open the vocabulary for the three persons, the status of the Holy Spirit and how to treat those who disliked the word. The argument continued for decades and ended with the council at Constantinople in 381.
Think it through
- Is it better for a church to keep to biblical words or to adopt new ones to answer errors? What are the risks of each?
- How might the involvement of the emperor have helped and harmed the council?
- What does the story of Nicaea suggest about how to resolve disagreements in the church today?
Independent assignment
Reading the creed of 325
In your own notebook, write about 450 words. Read the creed of 325 in a collection of the councils. Copy each phrase about the Son on one side of a page, and on the other side write the Arian claim it answers. Then explain in a paragraph why you think the council added the anathemas. Do not send this to anyone.
Further study
- Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, eds., The Seven Ecumenical Councils (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 2, vol. 14) Read the creed and canons of Nicaea.
- Council of Nicaea (325) and Council of Constantinople (381), The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed Compare the creed of 381 with the creed of 325.
- Athanasius of Alexandria, On the Incarnation of the Word Read for the theology behind the Nicene position.
- J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines Read the account of the Council of Nicaea.
- Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity Read for the general narrative of Constantine and the council.
- John 1:1 The Word was God.
- John 10:30 I and my Father are one.
- Hebrews 1:3 The express image of his person.