Council of Nicaea
Nicene Council
“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?” (Matthew 7:15-16)
Constantine was no shepherd of Christ much less a "bishop of bishops" of Christ's church. The more we study the detailed thorns of Constantine’s life and those ministers he and his successors appointed over men, the less convincing it is that the fruits of the Holy Spirit were in their questionable conversions. There were thousands upon thousands that suffered and toiled under their “exercising authority”[1], with tens of thousands who died at their murderous, bloody hands. The testimony of their lives bears witness to the purity or impurity of their souls and their claim to faith in Christ.
“Constantine intervened in ecclesiastical affairs to achieve unity; he presided over the first ecumenical council of the church at Nicaea in 325.”[2]
He claimed the office of Pontifex Maximus or High Priest, till he died. As the ruling High Priest, he had demanded that the bishops of the Church come to his council. There were over 1200 to 1800 known bishops at that time of this council depending on the source you rely on but at best barely 300 people who could be titled bishop even came.[3] They were not all bishops who did arrive, many could only be called presbyters and deacons with many leaving in protest.
According to the "Reconstructing the Council of Nicaea" by David Gwyn the final decisions of that particular council contained only 200 to maybe 220 people calling themselves bishop with the vast majority coming from the east.
It appears the few western attendees[4] included Hosius of Corduba (also a.k.a. Osius or Ossius) who was an advocate of Homoousion Christianity and had also attended "The Synod of Elvira" some 20 years earlier.
While the vast majority of bishops did not come we know that many who did were paid sums and provided for out of the treasury of Constantine.[5] That would be like Peter going to Rome at the expense of Caligula or Claudius or even Nero.
Some came to settle disputes that were stirring emotions about Arianism whose supporters included Eusebius of Nicomedia, Eusebius of Caesarea, Menophantus of Ephesus, Patrophilus of Scythopolis, Narcissus of Neronias, Theonas of Marmarike, Secundus of Ptolemais, and Theognis of Nicaea who would find themselves opposed by Alexander of Alexandria, Eustathius of Antioch, Marcellus of Ancyra and Macarius of Jerusalem.[6]
A seat of gold
Constantine sat on a golden throne, claiming to be the “Bishop of Bishops”, not as a servant of servants, but as a dictator.
Constantine I organized the Council along the lines of the Roman Senate and presided over it.
Pre-Constantine is an interesting nomenclature. The Church established by Jesus through His "calling out" of His "little flock" and the. appointment of "a kingdom" is clear in the text of scripture.
The Church of Constantine floundered with unrighteous support for a thousand years until it began crowning kings all over Europe and began oppression in earnest. With an inquisition of the faithful and rewriting the truth of history few people today understand what the early Church was doing and how it functioned in the "world" but not of it.
Where does Christ give the authority to the ministers of His Church to dictate a unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom?
The First Council of Nicaea instituted by Constantine promoted a false ideology that religion is "what you think about God". This lie fueled by debate began redefining the word "religion" and has brought persecution, inquisitions, and wars ever since. But the greatest enemy of the Church as it was meant to be is "lack of knowledge" and false pride which keeps the people in darkness.
From Nicene Creed with the birthing pains of new doctrines which would not only unmoor the Gospel of the kingdom from its meaning but cover the truth in a cloud of doctrinal beliefs, rituals and ceremonies.
The historical record shows that those who answered the call of Constantine were financially rewarded with the spoils of Constantine's imperial rule for he clearly eas a ruler who continued to "exercise authority one over the other".[1]
Extravagant gifts of gold, silver, buildings, property, and privilege were bestowed on these collaborating bishops who accepted his rule from the top down. Those bishops who sanctioned his benevolence and title of “bishop of bishops” are difficult to justify since they were desires of his "dainties" in direct opposition to the Doctrine of Jesus.[1]
Did they abandon the teachings of Christ for the rewards of unrighteousness?
His gifts had been taken from fields of corpses and from an overtaxed populations. These false bishopdid not corrupt the Church established by Christ but established false religion in the name of Christ. They would say Lord,Lord with a form of godliness but denied the power to live by faith, hope, and charity alone through pure Religion.
If ever there was a sin of the Nicolaitan branded on the head of men, it was here at this council of hypocrisy. How could men justify this fundamental departure from the teachings of Christ by becoming the state Church of Constantine?
Fortunately, these men were a small minority.
True Christian faith continued to thrive in those who remained in the liberty of Christ.
Council of Constantinople
Those who did not answer his call or questioned his assumed authority were sent packing or, in the years to follow, were labeled heretics and cast out of the graces of these despotic '‘bishops'’, or simply murdered as heretics.
In 381 A.D., the Council of Constantinople was convened by Theodosius I. Only 150 bishops attended condemning various religious groups that did not heed the call of the emperor.
These were the bishops who took the gifts, gratuities, and benefits of men who exercise authority in direct contradiction of Christ.
Theodosius was as much a tyrant, and more, a murder of thousands than Constantine.
Several emperors had earlier guaranteed the protection of the Church. The idea that the Church was “legalized” may not be far from the truth, but what exactly does that mean?
There was now an official Church of Rome established by men who found favor with the rulers of Rome, but were they true Christians?
Or were they taking the name of the Lord in vain?
The legalizing of the Christian church was more a legalizing of certain collaborative sects of churches who claimed to be Christians and were willing to turn a blind eye, or at least give a grateful wink, to the autocratic oppression by these manipulating chiefs of state in exchange for exemption, if not wealth and protection.
Christ would not appeal to Rome to save his life, but these men petitioned Constantine and his senate, not to save their own life, but to take the lives of others. Abraham would not take a buckle, but these men took lavish gifts of gold and silver. They seemed to be “the lovers of soft things” like the Essenes spoken of in the courts of Herod.
These sects and governments have been able to control the writing of history throughout the ages. But, probably even more importantly, they promoted the compilation of the books we know today as the Bible. There is no clear record of how some writings were excluded and how others were chosen to be placed into what some referred as the canon.
“The 27 books of the New Testament are only a fraction of the literary production of the Christian communities in the first three centuries.”[7]
The Icon is depicting Emperor Constantine, accompanied by his bishops of the First Council of Nicaea, holding the Niceno–Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 which is impossible since it would be written 50 years later. Constantine was instituting a new Church maintaining some of the teachings of Christ for his own purposes that often strayed considerably from the Doctrines of Jesus which crept into the minds of the people altering The Way of righteousness.
The synod of new doctrines
This general synod[8] was announced by Hosius of Cordoba[9] and was to be held in Ancyra. These new bishops chosen by the people who converted to "Christianity" by the Edict of Milan would divide people with the doctrines of men opposing the Doctrines of Jesus.
What were these new doctrines and what would their effect be then and now?
What mechanism or "Instrumentum regni" was available to Constantine to work his influence upon Christian doctrine?
What element not present in the Church established by Christ would need to be introduced by the world to bring in Apostasy?
Emperor Constantine eventually moved the convocation that was to be in Ancyra to Nicaea. This First Council of Nicaea opened on 20 May 325 and was "quite different" in its purposes and outcome. "[10]
Constantine, upon the recommendations of Hosius of Corduba[9]there was to be a synod[8] at Antioch led by his advisor Hosius of Cordoba. They had called all 1800 bishops of the Christian church (about 1000 in the east and 800 in the west), but only 250 to 320 bishops actually participated.
This council was called ecumenical[11] and was an effort to attain consensus in a group identified as a church through an assembly representing a new form of Christendom and would depend upon the approval and support of Constantine to impose their goals on all who disagreed.
"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... Constantine’s participation was decisive for the success of Nicaea..."[10]
Although there are those who will report that it was the Roman Emperor Constantine convoked the first general (or “ecumenical”) council of the Catholic Church, that of Nicaea It was not the first council of bishops.
We have to look at what was going on at the time of these councils. After the Edict of Milan there was a huge influx of "christians by edict" who were baptized but may have not actually repented.
These converts by edict knew little about Christ but chose men like Ambrose to be their bishops even though they knew nothing about the Doctrines of Jesus by their own admission.
These new bishops and their converts by edict added their numbers but did not always want to give up all their old beliefs and ways.
In 313 Hosius of Cordoba[9] appears at the court of Constantine after the Edict of Milan was signed in February. mentioned by name in a constitution directed by the emperor to Caecilianus of Carthage in that year. He is not listed among the attendees of the Synod of Arles of 314,
"The Council issued no fewer than twenty directives or canons (from the Greek canon, “rule” or “standard”) on such issues as the computation of the date of Easter, the manner of receiving back into the Church those who had apostatized during the persecutions, the conditions for ordination to the priesthood and elevation to the episcopate, questions concerning the conduct of the Church’s liturgy and official prayer, even usury, the taking of unjust interest."
- "Just as the apostles at the primitive Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) did not doubt their authority to decide for the Church with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, so the bishops at Nicaea took for granted that they too possessed authority to decide for the whole Church." [12]
"Athanasius described how Constantius once dealt with a group of recalcitrant bishops at a local council in Milan in 355. The bishops were refusing to sign a condemnation of Athanasius and to “receive the heretics into communion” they “protested against this innovation in Church discipline, crying out that such was not the ecclesiastical rule.” Whereupon the emperor broke in: “My will is canon law! Bishops in Syria make no such objections when I address them. Obey me or . . . exile.”" [12]
320 or 321 Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria, convoked a council at Alexandria at which more than one hundred bishops from Egypt and Libya anathematized Arius, his deacon.[2] In autumn 324 Hosius was the bearer of Constantine's letter to Bishop Alexander and Arius, in which he urged them to reconcile. After the Synod in Alexandria, Hosius led another synod in Antioch probably on the occasion of the election of Eustathius, after the death of Philogonius on November 324.
Leaders attended such as Eustathius of Antioch[13], Alexander of Alexandria[14], Athanasius[15], and Marcellus of Ancyra[16] all adhered to the Homoousian position. [17]
The council and most of its participants wanted to exercise authority one over the other and what they could believe, such as, who could be ministers of the people and who should be exiled. They also wanted to continue to receive financial support from Constantine.
The Council of Nicaea, in May 325, would declare Arius a heretic after he refused to sign the formula of faith stating that Christ was of the same divine nature as God.
Arius asserted a dissimilarity between the Son and the Father. Arianism holds that the Son is distinct from the Father and therefore subordinate to him which is concluded from Jesus conversation and prayers with God the Father and submission to His will.
In spite of his sympathy for Arius, Eusebius of Caesarea adhered to the decisions of the Council, accepting the entire creed.
If we take into consideration Christ's prohibition to His followers concerning exercising authority one over the other a serious concern may arise as to the authority of such a council.
These men were assembled by Constantine who convoked men[18] into a council that chose to banish Arian leaders from their churches for heresy. There is no doubt that under the Perfect law of liberty christian laity, ministers, deacons and bishops have the right to state they believe Arian leaders were heretics. Arianism was a doctrine that held that Christ was not divine but was a created being. That certainly may be incorrect for many reasons but did they have a right to banish people because they disagreed with them?
They also established the equality of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit in what they identified as the Trinity and asserted that only the Son became incarnate as Jesus Christ.
It is said to be a synod[8] held at Antioch where, bishops who were supporting Arius were suspended
The power to suspend a bishop is the power to exercise authority one over the other.
Where did such power come from?
There were at least 7 other councils.[19]
Many of these bishops like Ambrose were not chosen as Christ had commanded nor were the people claiming to be believers in Christ who were electing them true [followers]] of The Way of Christ.
They were still fond of the legal charity provided by Constantine which was the wages of unrighteousness.
The idea of banishing a minister is certainly not compatible with the free practice of religion nor the directives of Jesus.
The early Church was organized in small groups of ten families as Christ commanded. Those group also gathered with each other through a network of ministers including deacons and bishops.
This was essential for a righteous daily ministration as needed or as practical. Christians would not partake of the free bread or dainties or welfare offered by the governments of the world because they exercise authority one over the other which Christ forbid.
Without that network of tens, hundreds and thousands Paul and Barnabas would not have been able to bring the relief provided by them as we see in Acts and the Epistles and survival without the "reward of unrighteousness" would have been near impossible during the dearths spoken of in the Bible.
"But in the end, Julian's revival failed. Much like the res publica of old, and the empire of the tetrarchs which sought to construct a political theology in order to bolster unity, so too would the later Christian emperors embrace the tradition that loyalty to the political community was based on one's adherence to the civic religion. In the case of the emperors who ruled before the onset of the fifth century, that religion would be Nicene Christianity." [20]
If you need help:
- Or want to help others:
Join The Living Network of The Companies of Ten
The Living Network |
Join Local group |
About |
Purpose |
Guidelines |
Network Removal
Contact Minister |
Fractal Network |
Audacity of Hope |
Network Links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2
- Matthew 20:25 "But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you:..."
- Mark 10:42 "But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But ye shall not be so:..."
- Luke 22:25 "And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye [shall] not [be] so:..."
- ↑ Microsoft Encarta 97
- ↑ Athanasius of Antioch giving a number as high as 318 according to "The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381" by Richard Hanson.
- ↑ Caecilianus of Carthage, Nicasius of Die, Marcus of Calabria, and Domnus of Pannonia. There was also a Victor and Vicentius who were only elders sent by Sylvestor of Rome.
- ↑ "Hosting the Council in Nicaea" by Dr. Ine Jacobs of Oxford, her writings on this topic can be found in The Cambridge Companion to the Council of Nicaea which was edited by Young Richard Kim.
- ↑ "The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381" by Richard Hanson.
- ↑ Funk & Wagnalls New Encyclopedia Vol. 4 p.47
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 The term synod is from the Greek synodos, an “assembly”, in a church, a local or provincial assembly of bishops or other church officials meeting to resolve questions of discipline or administration. To determine is it is a Christian synod are they coming into one accord or are they choosing to exercise authority or "legislative authority" which Christ forbid.
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 Hosius of Corduba, also known as Osius or Ossius, was a bishop of Corduba and a prominent advocate for Homoousion Christianity in the Arian controversy that divided the early Christianity. He is believed to have presided at the First Council of Nicaea and also presided at the Council of Serdica. After Lactantius, he was the closest Christian advisor to Emperor Constantine the Great and guided the content of public utterances, such as Constantine's Oration to the Saints, addressed to the assembled bishops. He was willing to exile others he was also exiled remaining obstinate in his support of Athanasius the Great, Athanasius the Confessor, an anti Arian trinitarian Coptic exiled no less than 5 times.
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 "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. Who Convened the First Council of Nicaea: Constantine or Ossius? Samuel Fernández, The Journal of Theological Studies, Volume 71, Issue 1, April 2020, Pages 196–211, Published by Oxford University Press.
- ↑ An ecumenical council, also called general council, is a meeting of bishops and other church authorities to consider and rule on questions of Christian doctrine, administration, discipline, and other matters. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 12 September 2020.
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 The Church of Nicaea and Constantinople, KENNETH D. WHITEHEAD • 5/1/1997 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "Whitehead" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ He detested the Arian heresy, and would not receive those who held Arian opinions, an attack on him was made so that he died in exile, after the return of Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis from exile.
- ↑ Was given the authority to settle the dating of Easter, judge the actions of Meletius of Lycopolis, and opposed Arianism. He thought he should not serve as both presiding official and chief accuser of Arianism allowing the presidency to go to Hosius of Cordova. After lengthy discussion, the council issued a decision which, among other things, confirmed the anathema of Arius, authorized Alexander, at his urging, to allow Meletius to retain his episcopal title, but not be able to exercise any episcopal powers.
- ↑ http://csla.history.ox.ac.uk/record.php?recid=E01235 Was the chief defender of Trinitarianism against Arianism, and a noted Coptic Christian (Egyptian) leader who was exiled for cutting off essential grain supplies to Arians of Constantinople in need. There were several other times he was exiled from his "episcopal see" which was said to be an "ecclesiastical jurisdiction".
- ↑ Marcellus was deposed at Constantinople in 336 at a council under the presidency of Eusebius of Nicomedia, the Arian, and Basil of Ancyra appointed to his "episcopal see". Marcellus sought redress at Rome from Pope Julius I, who wrote to the bishops who had deposed Marcellus, arguing that Marcellus was innocent of the charges brought against him. In his Ecclesiastical History, Sozomen noted that Marcellus, in order to convert the pagans more easily in Apamea, “destroyed the temples of the city and its villages".
- ↑ Eusebius of Caesarea counted 250, Athanasius of Alexandria counted 318, and Eustathius of Antioch counted 270 (all three were present at the council). Later, Socrates Scholasticus recorded more than 300, and Evagrius, Hilarius, Saint Jerome and Rufinus recorded 318.
- ↑ Convoked call together or summon (an assembly or meeting)
- ↑ Council of Constantinople in 381, the Council of Ephesus in 431, the Council of Chalcedon in 451, the Second Council of Constantinople in 553, the Third Council of Constantinople from 680–681 and finally, the Second Council of Nicaea in 787.
- ↑ [https://ruor.uottawa.ca/bitstream/10393/35025/1/Miletti_Domenico_2016_thesis.pdf The Blood of the Martyrs: The Attitudes of Pagan Emperors and Crowds Towards Christians, From Nero to Julian], Epilogue, Domenico Miletti
Links to other articles
Saved |
Eternal life |
The Blessed Strategy |
The Way |
Whosoever believeth |
Nailing it to His cross |
Worship |
Faith |
Hope |
Charity |
The Peaceful Majority |
Allegiance and Faith |
Unbeliever |
Grace |
Duty |
Keep the Commandments |
Bible |
Salvation |
Sacrifices |
Faithful |
Believer |
Consent |
Judge not |
Divers lusts |
Greed |
Lasciviousness |
Wantonness |
Dry Bones |
Gospel of the Kingdom |
Perfect law of liberty |
Network Purpose |
Religion |
Pure Religion |
Private welfare |
Fleeing Religion |
False religion |
Public religion |
Our Religion |
Christian conflict |
Corban |
Baptism |
Benefactors |
That Word |
Daily ministration |
Modern Christians |
Diocletianic Persecution |
Christians check list |
gods |
Judge not |
Judge |
Fathers |
Deist |
Damnable heresies |
Factions at the altar |
Pharisees |
Sadducees |
Zealot |
Essenes |
Levites |
Messianic Judaism |
Menahem the Essene |
Sanhedrin |
Altars |
Clay and Stone |
Red Heifer |
Golden calf |
Freewill offerings |
Religion |
Pure Religion |
Public religion |
Christian conflict |
Paganism |
Denominations |
Dispensationalism |
Benefactors |
Corban |
Daily ministration |
Calendars |
Cult |
Imperial Cult of Rome |
Guru theories| |
Covet |
Merchandise |
Mark of God |
Mark of Cain |
Mark of the Beast |
Nature of the Beast
Section 666 |
Benefactors |
Biting one another |
Cry out |
Worship |
Church |
Temples |
Religious Orders |
Priests |
Kings and priests |
Hear |
Bible Index |
Network |
See more Forbidden Definitions