Search

In February 2022, the central committee of the World Council of Churches (WCC) agreed the proposal for a World Conference on Faith and Order to be held in 2025 to coincide with the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea. This will be the sixth such world conference since the First World Conference on Faith and Order was held in 1927 in Lausanne, Switzerland. Against this background, this article reviews the history of the World Conferences on Faith and Order from the origins of the Faith and Order movement to the Fifth World Conference on Faith and Order in 1993. Although created autonomous and self‐governing, organized around regular world conferences, with the creation of the WCC in 1948, the Faith and Order movement became a commission of the WCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the Commission on Faith and Order of the World Council of Churches (WCC) prepares to mark the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea in 2025, its distinctive task is to invite the churches to commemorate ecumenically and to consider the search for visible unity under the theme "Living the apostolic faith together today." Recognizing the diverse expectations of Christians for this anniversary, Faith and Order is planning a year of ecumenical events and opportunities, including a World Conference on Faith and Order with both in‐person and livestreamed participation. The 2025 Week of Prayer for Christian Unity will focus on the Nicaea commemoration, and Faith and Order will collaborate with other WCC units and the churches. Topics for discussion are grouped under three themes: faith, unity, and mission. Online activities will enhance the opportunities for Christians around the globe to encounter one another in a spirit of love and reconciliation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is widely recognized that the Council of Nicaea marks a watershed in relations between Christians and Jews – both specifically the Ecumenical Council itself and also more generally the decades around and following 325. It was at this time that the separation between Christians and Jews, and between Christianity and Judaism, can be said to have reached a definitively final form, the conclusion of the long, drawn‐out process referred to as the "parting of the ways." Despite periods of co‐existence and mutual enrichment, the history of Christian–Jewish relations has too often been marked by toxicity and tragedy. Christians have not only distinguished themselves from Jewish peoplebut have treated them with disparagement, exclusion, and, at times, persecution; moreover, Christian anti‐Judaism prepared the ground for a still more deadly secular antisemitism. Against this background, this article approaches the question of how to mark the 1700th anniversary of the First Council of Nicaea in terms of its significance for Christian–Jewish relations in our own time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The year 2025 will mark the 1700th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council, the Council of Nicaea, which initiated a new chapter in the history of the Christian Church. The World Council of Churches is planning to organize a World Conference on Faith and Order to celebrate this anniversary and to reflect on the transmission of the apostolic faith today. This conference is not intended to study the history of the council nor to study its theology, but rather to reflect on what "visible unity" means to different Christian churches and how Christians can collectively promote, preach, and live the apostolic faith today in the context of many contemporary challenges, such as secularization and religious pluralism. In this perspective, the present article reflects on the actuality of the Council of Nicaea and how it still ought to be considered as normative for the Christians of the 21st century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why should Christians from churches of the Reformation be marking the 1700th anniversary of Nicaea? Some Christians from such churches regard Nicaea as emblematic of Christianity's "fall" from the radical and subversive faith of Jesus' teaching, miracles, and welcome to become an abstract and theological discourse dependent not on the Bible but on Greek philosophy. Some ask why they should pay any attention to a long ago gathering of male bishops or let that gathering, rather than simply the Bible and their own personal faith experience, shape their understanding of Christianity. In this paper, the author, herself from a church often inclined to such Protestant critiques of Nicaea, suggests a more open approach and a positive understanding of Nicaea for today's church. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial is presented in which The World Council of Churches (WCC) is organizing a World Conference on Faith and Order in 2025 to mark the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea, aiming to bring churches together to discuss doctrinal differences and promote unity in faith and communion. The conference will explore the historical significance of Nicaea, its impact on Christianity today, and its relevance for Christian-Jewish relations.

The article discusses During a visit with Pope Francis in Rome, a delegation from the World Council of Churches (WCC) and the Roman Catholic Church reaffirmed their commitment to working together for justice, reconciliation, and unity. They discussed various topics, including the situation in Ukraine, the upcoming 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea, and the challenges faced by refugees due to climate change.

The ancient church historians affirmed that it was Constantine himself who convened the Council of Nicaea. However, a chronological examination of the contemporary documents shows that the convocation of Nicaea was quite different. This essay aims to examine the origin of the idea of holding the Nicene council. According to the available data, Ossius of Cordoba convened the great episcopal council that was to be held at Ancyra but ultimately occurred in Nicaea. Although Constantine's participation was decisive for the success of Nicaea, the study of the historical sources indicates that the original idea of holding the council that ultimately occurred at Nicaea must be credited to Ossius. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Augustine's Epistulae 23A*, 23*, and 22*, written in late 419 and early 420, present his involvement in the dispute concerning the translation of Honorius to Caesarea Mauretaniae (modern Cherchell), a city Augustine had visited in September 418 while fulfilling a commission from Zosimus of Rome. The translation of bishops from one church to another had been condemned by the 325 Council of Nicaea. The three letters are difficult to interpret because the information to his three correspondents (Possidius of Calama, Renatus, a monk of Caesarea Mauretaniae, and Alypius of Thagaste, who was in Italy at the time) seems to differ. A careful reading reveals that not only did Augustine's knowledge of the situation change over time, but that the stress he placed on differing elements of that situation also changed depending upon the correspondent. The letters also disclose the involvement of Boniface I of Rome, Zosimus' successor, and the complex relationship of the African churches with the bishop of Rome, especially in the matter of judicial appeal. What is suggested here is that Augustine, without saying so, seemed to be aware of the criteria Boniface had employed in another translation controversy, which was the approved translation of Perigenes as bishop of Corinth, and that, if applied to Honorius, this would lead the Roman bishop to reach a very different conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fourth-century Christianity and the Council of Nicaea have continually been read as a Constantinian narrative. The dominancy of imperial Christianity has been a consequent feature of the established narrative regarding the events within early Christianity. There is a case for a revisionist enquiry regarding the influence of the emperor in the formation of orthodoxy. The role of bishops and its political characterisation had definitive implications upon Christianity as it would seem. Recent revisions on Constantine by Leithart and Barnes incited the enquiry. The enquiry was made possible through document analysis; this mainly took the form of a literature study. The orthodoxy that emerged at Nicaea in 325 CE was reflective of the political–orthodoxy trajectory that Christianity took beyond the 4th century. Between imperial intervention and clerical polities, one was a definitive dynamic to the then emergent Christianity. The influence of the emperor, which was an apparently definitive feature characterising the era, was compositely relevant as a catalyst in the formation of the Christianity that emerged during the 4th century. The implication that centuries before the Council of Nicaea Christianity had been characterised by significant phases of socio-cultural dynamics relegates the influence of the emperor. The emperor Constantine and his association with the Council of Nicaea characterised an era of imperial ecclesiastical politics in Christianity, and so did the Jewish–Christian Schism and a monarchical episcopate that shaped the orthodox matrix of the church. This research deduced that the function of imperial intervention should be analysed in conjunction with diverse factors characterising the Christianity emergent at Nicaea, particularly ecclesiastical polities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the De decretis Athanasius claims that Arius ‘copied’ and ‘learned’ from Asterius. This study explores how this could have happened by arguing that in the writing of his Thalia Arius was influenced by Asterius’ Syntagmation. Besides complicating the literary and theological relationship between Arius and Asterius, this reconstruction provides the clearest evidence for the new perspective on Arius which has emerged in recent revisionist scholarship, and which argues that he is best understood as embedded within a theological tradition and as a catalysing participant in its efforts to articulate a theological vision. By dating the Syntagmation to about 322 and the Thalia to about 323 this study also gives qualified support to Rowan Williams's dating of some pre-Nicene events and discredits a recent attempt to position Asterius as having had a formative influence on Arius. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the history of the councils of the Church between the first ecumenical Council of Nicaea (325) and the Council of Constantinople (360). It discusses the happenings at these councils and the various creeds promulgated by them, to highlight that--contrary to popular belief--the reception of the Council of Nicaea was not immediate nor were its teachings well-received. In fact, Nicene theology had to face many serious challenges posed by various Arian groups in the period that followed. The Church was united under Emperor Constantine, who made the bishops append their signatures to the Nicene Creed in 325. Unity would once again be achieved in 360, but this time by the Arian Emperor Constantius, who secured the signatures of the bishops to the Homoian doctrine late at night on New Year's Eve 359. Although the final victory would eventually belong to the Nicenes, the aim of this essay is to underline the chaotic situation between those years, in order that one may better appreciate the context from which the Nicene Creed emerged to become the standard of orthodoxy it is today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The emphasis on God in American psychology of religion generates the problem of explaining divine-versus-natural causality in 'spiritual experiences.' Especially 'theistic psychology' champions divine involvement. However, its argument exposes a methodological error: to pit popular religious opinions against technical scientific conclusions. Countering such homogenizing 'postmodern agnosticism,' Bernard Lonergan explained these two as different modes of thinking: 'common sense' and 'theory'-which resolves the problem: When theoretical science is matched with theoretical theology, 'the God-hypothesis' explains the existence of things whereas science explains their natures; and, barring miracles, God is irrelevant to natural science. A review of the field shows that the problem is pervasive; attention to 'miracles'-popularly so-named versus technically-focuses the claims of divine-versus-natural causality; and specifications of the meaning of spiritual, spirituality, science, worldview, and meaning itself (suffering that same ambiguity: personal import versus cognitive content) offer further clarity. The problem is not naturalism versus theism, but commonsensical versus theoretical thinking. This solution demands 'hard' social science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In his recent commentary on Matthew, C. A. Evans suggested that Matt 27:52-53 is an early scribal interpolation. Although no extant manuscripts omit these verses, Evans argued that the absence of references to these verses in Christian literature prior to the Council of Nicaea supports this conjectural emendation. Although several German and Dutch scholars of the 18th and 19th centuries also proposed this emendation, most appealed primarily to historical and theological evidence. A thorough text-critical analysis has not previously been published. This essay explores the internal and external evidence and concludes that these verses belong to the earliest text of Matthew that can be established from currently available evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study is concerned with the period when the Church was confronted with the necessity to define the precise doctrine of the nature of the Son in the context of his relationship with the Father. The Church celebrated the first ecumenical council designed to resolve the controversy that was provoked by the conflicting theological pronouncements on this issue between Alexander, the bishop of Alexandria, and Arius. Two major issues are discussed in this article. The first deals with the theology of Arius that gave rise to the crisis in the local Church of Alexandria at first and then eventually spread to the whole of Christendom as more ecclesiastics involved themselves in the theological discourse. The second appertains to the Council of Nicea and its produced confession. The said council was convoked by the authority of the emperor in response to the theological crisis that was generated in the altercation between Arius and his bishop. These two issues will be prefaced by a brief narrative account that will locate the controversy and the personalities involved in history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Athanasius of Alexandria wrote his work De synodis in 359, during a period of great theological confusion. Many synods were held in few decades and their decisions were not always coherent, and sometime contradictory. In this context, the Bishop of Alexandria tries to establish some criteria to interpret the synodical decisions. The present article aims to identify and to classify these hermeneutical criteria as they are presented in De synodis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study which examines what the ante-Nicene fathers stated about Roman Governor Pontius Pilate. The medieval document "Mors Pilati" associates the tradition that Pilate committed suicide where his body was thrown into different bodies of water and demons followed the body of Pilate. It explores how early Christian writings, which include apocryphal literature, assess Pilate and the role of Pilate in the death of Jesus in different ways.

Copyright of Rivista di Storia del Cristianesimo is the property of Editrice Morcelliana S.p.A. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Upon taking office as bishop of Neocaesarea in Pontus, and in formulating his own theological position, Gregory of Neocaesarea (also known as Gregory the Wonder-worker) drew on what he had learnt under Origen in order to craft his own Statement of Faith. Sometime later, an alternative Statement of Faith was produced by Lucian of Antioch, premised on a different view of the relationships within the Trinity. Arius also responded to Gregorys Statement of Faith, contradicting it, point by point, in his Thalia. Even though Eusebius of Palestinian Caesarea would have been aware of Gregory's theology and Statement of Faith, he used Lucian's Statement when preparing the creed he submitted to the Council of Nicaea, in this way aligning himself with Lucian's theological perspective against Gregory's. Nevertheless, we can deduce that Gregory's theology lived on, serving as a background to the development of the theological positions of the famous Cappadocians, especially the brothers, Basil of Cappadocian Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa. Finally, we can say that there remains a parallel between the teachings of Cyril of Alexandria and Gregory of Neocaesarea, specifically in relation to their respective teachings on the sufferings of Christ. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on a series of pre-Romanesque fragments found in Kotor and several other localities in Boka Kotorska, which can be linked to an early phase in the formation of the pre-Romanesque style. Chronological orientation points provided by the triple mention of Bishop Ivan, who was present at the Second Council of Nicaea in 787, have served as a framework dating the fragments to the last quarter of the 8th and the early 9th century. They are considered to be work of a highly skilful stonemason workshop, for which the name Stonemason Workshop from the Time of Bishop Ivan of Kotor has been proposed. The reliefs have been compared to analogous sculptural decoration adorning the cathedrals of other cities in the Eastern Adriatic based on similar stylistic and iconographic features, as well as masterful stonemasonry in high-quality marble. These analogies indicate a common visual language used by the masters active in the broad belt stretching from Istria to Boka Kotorska, who brought to our coast the spirit of new, pre-Romanesque art at the turn of the 9th century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Book Forum presents essays that focus attention on one book, followed by a response from the author. The forums originate from panel discussions at academic meetings and may retain some of the style of an oral presentation, such as the use of the first person and references to the author by first name. The essays that follow are based on a panel discussion sponsored by the Christian Systematic Theology Section of the American Academy of Religion held in Chicago in 2012. The title of the session was, “The Authority of Doctrine: In Dialogue with Khaled Anatolios,” with Matthew Levering, Francesca Murphy, George Hunsinger, and Bruce Marshall as respondents. (Note: Matthew Levering’s response was not available for publication.)Khaled Anatolios, Retrieving Nicaea: The Development and Meaning of Trinitarian Doctrine, Ada MI: Baker Academic, 2011 [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article presents a case study of the Arian hymn "Thalia" and discusses the development of Trinitarian Orthodoxy. Topics discussed include acceptance of Arian hymnody by the First Council of Nicaea, influence of hymns written by presbyter Arius, and analysis of Thalia to show conflict between Arian and Nicene Trinitarian theology.

This paper tries to reconstruct the early development of the arian doctrine, on the basis of the documents written before the Nicene Council, in order to understand the original convictions that moved the actors of the fourth century's arian crisis. The paper studies separately the different types of sources and shows that the original motivation of Arius was not to reject the divinity of the Son, but to defend his real distinction from the Father, against sabelian theology. This fact allows us to understand why Arius' tendency obtained such a wide and fast support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract This paper responds to recent publications which play down the role of Bishop Alexander of Alexandria in securing the adoption of the term Homoousion at the Nicene Council of 325. It argues that, while the term is not employed in any surviving work from his hand, there is some reason to believe that he sanctioned the use of it by his colleagues. There is no doubt that before the Council he had already declared the Son to be 'from the Father's essence', and it is all but certain that when this phrase was challenged, together with the Homoousion at Nicaea, it was he who produced a conciliatory exegesis of both innovations, relying on the theology that had already been expounded in his letters Philostorgius' story that he and Hosius of Cordoba had concerted a plan to introduce the Homoousion is not implausible, and it should not be assumed that the author of an anonymous life of Constantine, which corroborates this narrative, is merely paraphrasing Philostorgius. Their testimony is consistent with that of Ambrose of Milan, who can be shown to have been acquainted both with documents and with witnesses of the proceedings at the Council. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores theological arguments raised by Saint Basil the Great in the fourth century regarding the equal honor of the Holy Spirit. It stresses necessity of understanding the Holy Spirit as part of the Trinity doctrine. It outlines details of the council of Nicaea in A.D. 325 where orthodox Christianity was protected against the Arian heresy of subordination. The divinity of the Holy Spirit particularly within the context of God according to Saint Athanasius is also discussed.

The article assesses whether confessors are influential and prominent participants in the Council of Nicaea as viewed in the Christian context. It assesses evidences that prove the popularity and explain the role played by confessors in the council. The author argues that the early church does not have a fixed definition on how they will view confessors. He views confessors as people in the early times who acknowledged the sufferings and persecutions that they may experience and the possibility that they die for faith convictions.

Bursa region was settled by various Thracian tribes ever since the ancient times. According to the well known geographer Strabon Bursa region was settled by the one of the Thracian tribes called Bithyns. After that time the region was called Bithynia because of this Thracian tribe. They were incorporated by king Croesus within the Lydian monarchy, with which they fell under the dominion of Persia (546 BC), and were included in the satrapy of Phrygia. But even before the conquest by Alexander the Bithynians appear to have asserted their independence, and successfully maintained it under the prince Zipoites. He assumed the title of king in 297 BC. But the last king, Nicomedes IV, was unable to maintain himself against Mithridates VI of Pontus, and, after being restored to his throne by the Roman Senate, he bequeathed his kingdom by will to the Roman republic (74 BC). In ancient times several major cities sat on the Prusa region: Cius, Apamea and Nicaea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An essay is presented on the appearance of the number 318 in Genesis 14:14 in the Hebrew Bible and references to it in history. The author presents several examples of the appearance of the number, as well as individuals and groups affixing symbolic significance to the number. The author refers to the number's presence in the possible count of attending bishops Council of Nicea, the first ecumenical Christian council convened regarding the Arian heresy and 318 being the Greek value for Helios.

Christian IVth century actually began in 313, with the tolerance edict placed under the name of Constantine the Great (307-337). Freedom has immediately brought to light differences separating certain ways of thinking from the Orthodoxy. While receiving a solemn formulation in Nicaea, in 325, the teaching of the Son's equality with the Father was the subject of numerous complaints and debates throughout the century. They will not stop until the Second Synod of Constantinople, convened in 381. Marked by the semi-Arian tradition of the East, it will issue a document whose orthodoxy is correct, but hesitantly expressed, in terms taken from the Scripture, and not assuming the dogmatic progress of the latest debates. Although the council has been criticized for his attitude, starting with St. Gregory Nazianzen, the document signed there has the merit to be the Church creed par excellence, and to have entered deeply into the consciousness of all Orthodox Christians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is said that being asked about the historical importance of the French Revolution, the Prime Minister of President Mao responded: "It is still too early to say". When it comes to assessing the impact of Vatican II, the possibility of expediting the trial over their consequences is presented. It is only possible to assess the impact of a long-term council. Many centuries required the Church to measure the depth of the reforms of the Council of Trent of the Council of Nicaea that gave birth to the present Creed that sustains our faith today. That which in the vicinity seemed determinant vanished in a few years, while distant generations harvested unexpected fruits of the events. [TRANSLATION]

The Council of Nicea, with its prolegomena and consequences, can be seen in some of its aspects as an example of the commitment between true ecclesial communion and ephemeral political communion. In the present article the explanation of the origins of Arianism is approached on the basis of two factors: the Alexandrine tradition, which is not free from tensions after the death of Origen, and the influence of Lucian of Antioch on Anus himself. With all this we see evidence of the relationship between the Nicean solution to the conflict and communion within the Church. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Terminological confusion exacerbated by councils divided the church in late antiquity. John of Damascus addressed the resultant terminological impasse by providing the re-established Jerusalem patriarchate with theological polemic that reemphasized the preeminence of the Council of Nicaea. John's early works relied on scripture and patristic argument, but after his philosophical works, his theological method couched scripture and patristic argument in terms of a new philosophical acumen. Building on this change in theological method, I argue that John's theological argument also underwent development using the term " perichōrēsis " as a case study, resulting in a provisional date-list of John's polemical works. I then argue that development in John appears to have an ecumenical motivation by analyzing his redeployment of the theological technical term " perichōrēsis " from his Christology to his Trinitarianism. I argue that John subordinates his Christology to a terminologically clarified Nicene Trinitarianism in order to address concerns of his local inter-locutors by re-casting local christological debate in three ways: 1) he couched his Christology in terms of a specifically Nicene heresiology shifting fifth- and sixth-century theologians off-stage, whether Cyril of Alexandria, Severus of Antioch, or Maximus the Confessor, pushing Gregory of Nazianzus to the fore as universal authority; 2) he avoided the critique of Aristotelianism by couching his Christology in terms of the Nicene locus classicus, John 10.30; and finally, 3) he adroitly granted but restated the theological premise of his interlocutors turning their argument on its head. Thus, John grounds his innovative theological polemic in the tradition while providing his bishop and the newly re-established patriarchate with a more progressive and ecumenical theological method, argument, and polemic. [End Page 625] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a call for Christians of all denominations to celebrate the resurrection of Christ on the same day on April 8, 2012. It mentions that in the early Christian centuries, there was a disagreement about the date of the Easter because the Ecumenical Council of Nicaea established a rule that Easter should be celebrated on the Sunday following the first full moon after the Spring equinox while most of the Orthodox Christians wanted to keep to the Julian calendar. In response, it states that a conference was held at Aleppo, Syria to establish a common date that would be acceptable to the whole Christian world. Further, it notes that April 8, 2012 was calculated according to the rule and method agreed by Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox during the seminar in Aleppo.